I do have big important things to say, but I haven't quite finished saying them yet. (I do a lot of editing.) I'm hoping to be finished the big "What's Going Down in My Life (Part 1?)" in a week or so, but in the mean time, here's some pictures of me jumping off a bridge.
Apparently this is the biggest bungee jump in the world. So, you know, if you're there you've got to do it, right?
Btw, does anyone know how to turn a dvd movie into something internetable? I don't think I have the right gadgets.
[+/-] In Lieu of Substance |
[+/-] Say It Ain't So |
I will keep this short. Not because I have little to say, nor because I think the matter I'm addressing is of little significance, nor because I've finally learned the importance of brevity (someday, perhaps), but because I'm rushing off to camp again tomorrow, and I have little time to spare.
Consider this passage: "I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments." (Exodus 20:5-6)
Assuming that you're as disgusted with what this verse seems to say as I am, can you please explain to me how God is not saying here that he punishes children for their father's sins?
6 comments:
A Biblical example would be the destruction of Canaan, or Jerusalem, or any other sinful city where the children and infants are destroyed along with those being punished for thier sin. As for the world today, well, war in the middle east, world hunger, terrorism and so on are largely caused by the sins of adults and children suffer. (I guess the difference is, in this case the suffering may not directly from God).
I guess the question I would ask is: does God think it is just to punish children for the sins of their parents, or is He mentioning what inevitably what inevitably happens (when adults suffer so do their children)?
And no I don't like this verse any more than you do. I think it's horribly unfair... what I do like is the Bible's willingness (or the willingness of it's writers, I guess) to tackle topics as unpleasant and tragic as this one, which are plain to see but difficult to deal with.
If you want to interpret this verse as descriptive of injustice in a fallen world (not of God's sense of justice) can you explain how keeping God's commandments can, through natural means, have a positive effect on our descendants a thousand generations down the line?
(If you take this number literally, this blessing would last about 20,000 years, give or take, and potentially cover billions of descendants. By comparison, this proclamation was made less than 3500 years ago, and the earth itself is only 6000 years old, according to those who take the Bible most literally.)
The context, the tone, and the wording of this verse seem inescapably clear to me (though I seem to be in the minority). But I've been mistaken about the Bible before, and I would be much relieved (and not entirely suprised) to discover that I'm wrong once again.
In the ancient world (old testament. for example) it seems it was common practice to punish children for their parent's sins. Kings killed the families of traitors (books of Esther and Daniel, for example), Ahab's entire line was wiped out, and so on. Not sure if this was God's idea of justice (I'd like to think it isn't) but He certainly worked biblically in that framework.
Think of King DAvid. First his illegitimate child, and then the entire people of isreal were punished for David's sins. When Achan sinned in Joshua, the peopel of isreal lost a battle.. and some lives.. I'm sure you can think of a billion examples.
It worked the other way as well... God showed favor to Solomon for David's sake... in the OT the greatest reward was always "your line will do such-and-such, your children will do so-and-so, you will have many offspring.." Me personally, I wouldn't be too impressed by a blessing given to my descendants (give it to me!) but back then.. that's how things worked, not sure why, an expert on the ancient world would know.
Also, it's worth noting that God had a very special reward-punishment relationship with isreal.. Do good and prosper, do bad and be punished.. a scenario that plays itself out over and over and over again until Jesus comes... these rewards/punishments were given to the people of isreal as a group.. including the innocent children (the kids dragged off to babylon, wandering the desert for 40 y, etc)... not sure God works what way with the rest of the world anymore.
Maybe these thoughts don't make the verse any easier to swallow. I personally find the idea of corporate responsibility expremely distateful, and kinda scary if I am to be held responsible for the actions of the Christian church or the Western World today..
however, looking that verse the way an ancient Hebrew might have looked at it... Would he have seen injustice and been appalled, or would he have said "ya, punishment for a few generations... that's how things work, that's what our kings do, but holy crap God is sure gracious to those who are obedient!"
[+/-] The Way It Will Have To Be |
I'm back from Africa. I didn't find God, I'm sorry to say. I think I may have been in the wrong part. (It's a big continent, you know.) Hopefully I'll get to do a more thorough search some day. I'm also going to camp in a couple days, which is where I often feel, if not exactly close to God, at least most favorably disposed to him.
I'm starting to wonder again if there's something wrong with me. I mean, I know there are a lot of things wrong with me, but I'm wondering if I suffer from some deep and crippling soul-illness as a result of my personal inadequacies and sins. I have long been aware that I do not see what others see (or think they see) spiritually, but for the most part I've come to accept that I live in the dark. But then every once in a while I wonder if the problem is that I'm just blind, like the dwarves in "The Last Battle".
If I am saved by grace alone, saved from and in spite of my sins, and if I am saved for relationship with God, is it possible that my sins still keep me from the relationship both God and I desire? And is it possible that my sins could still bind me while other's sins do not?
I do not claim to be worthy of relationship with God. I know myself too well for that. I know how sinful I am, and how undisciplined. When I sought God, years ago, I sought impatiently, inexpertly (though not, I believe, insincerely). If you say I sought too briefly, too imperfectly, too greedily or proudly or lazily to expect results, I will agree. But I know that if I mastered myself, overcame my desire and impatience and doubt and human frailty and devoted every breath and thought exclusively to the pursuit of God, I could never merit the intimacy with Him that I seek and so many Christians claim. As a seeker of God I deserve nothing, but which of us deserve more?
I have never heard from God, but then, I seldom speak to him. If there's any spiritual value in Bible reading I doubt I'll ever discover it - I hardly read any more. Worship for me tends to be hollow and tiresome. Tongues, healings and anointings look fake to me, even farcical. And while I could still force myself to attend services, read the Bible daily, even pray, my faith and hope are spent. I could drag myself through disciplines and routines, but I cannot believe that they will bring me to God.
It's not that I don't want to believe, it's that I am no longer able. My choice is to perform a spiritual charade and be miserable, or to ignore God (or at least my desire for him) and be at peace. If I choose the latter, I can continue to strive towards goodness and love. If I choose the former, I will be not only unhappy but ineffective. (Even thinking about this again makes me feel sick, and if I dwell on it I quickly become self-absorbed and self-abusive.)
I haven't entirely given up on earthly intimacy with God, but I am done pursuing it. If it is to happen, God must take the first step. That is the way it will have to be, because my faith is gone.
3 comments:
If you think that their might be a God, consider this, it's my searching story...
I wasn't really looking for God, I didn't believe he existed, and therefore had no need to search. One day he sent me a friend named Khurram. He's from Pakistan and a Muslim. I had many many late night deep discussions about the existence of God. I argued that God was supposed to be all loving, all powerful, but how can those two qualities exist in this being considering the world I live in, ie. war, famine, human slavery, child molestation, and, and, and,.... If God was all loving then it seems that an all loving powerful God wouldn't allow suffering, and being all powerful, could stop all the "bad things." Yet he doesn't.
Then there's the fact of all the religions in the world.
(how appropriate, Kid Rock's Only God's Knows Why just came on the radio)
The true belivers in any given religion, with a whole heart, think that their version is correct.
We argued both points, along with various others, with him winning all of them.
In order to believe in God I believe a few ideas have to be accepted.
1. God is all knowing
2. God is all powerful
3. We, mere humans do not have the ability to analyze or understand God
4. God created the world in his time, which, by the way, isn't our time.
5. God sent messengers, called prophets, to spread his message.
6. Humans have free will. We are the only being with this ability.
7. Only God can choose who will go to heaven/hell. By choosing I am referring to a passage in the Q'uran (I don't remember what Surah, and this isn't definately not verbatim or even close, just what I remember from the reading) The passage says that God will reveal himself to whom he chooses, and there are certain people he won't choose.
8. The Bible, The Torah, and the Q'uran are all valid books. I don't know if you are aware of this, but the Q'uran acknowledges the existence of both the Torah and the Bible, called the Injeel or Gospel. Muslims belive in all the stories in the Torah and the Bible, and say that the Q'uran was sent to Muhammad(pbuh) to set the record straight because His message had become distorted.
Between Christianity and Islam there are, I believe, two major discrepancies...One is the concept of Original sin. Christians believe Eve screwed everything up when she ate the apple. That because of her and Adam everyone else is doomed. Muslims have no concept of original sin. They believe that everyone is 100% responsible and held accountable for their own actions.
-Sorry a bit sidetracked-
I do suggest reading the Torah and the Q'uran, along with the Bible, but approach it more like just reading a story more than worshipping. When you look at all three of them and put them together it seems to make a clearer picture, at least for me.
I said to him at one point, ok, if God does exist then why would he do this. The he asked me, Would you rather exist? or not exist? I pondered the thought for a moment, and figured even though this life may feel like a living hell sometimes, It truly is a wonderful gift to have I that I would definately choose to exist. Then he said the words to me that converted me from Agnosticism to believing in a monotheistic Godism. He said, God gave you the privelige to extist. Those seven words changed my soul. Then I read the Q'uran. I'm not trying to turn you into a Muslim. I am not a Muslim, but I understand their "version" of religion a bit more. There are some very beautiful verses in the Q'uran though, even in English. (the Q'uran is meant to be read in Arabic only) There is something in it about God giving the trees the option of free choice and they froze with their branches raised to the heavens in fear of the opportunity, preferring to bend instead only when God willed it.
The english version is a fairly easy read, a bit over me at times, but not so bad. I have had a much harder time reading the bible.
Sorry I'm all over the place. It's been a rough few days for me and i'm just a rambling on....
Again, welcome home.
Raina
I'm not sure whether you're saying that one cannot believe in God if one doesn't believe the eight points you list; if this is so, I must disagree.
I cannot accept that God created people to be "objects of his wrath, prepared for destruction" (Romans 9).
I'm not at all settled on the doctrine of original sin, but I can't accept that you and I deserve to be punished for Adam's sin.
I haven't read the Q'uran, though I hope to do so in the near future.
I'm personally not encouraged by the "would you rather not exist?" arguement for theism. (Paul gives a similar arguement in Rom 9:19-21.) It strikes me that an abusive parent could use the same arguement to justify his cruelty, but I don't see how bringing someone into existence gives you license to subject them to gratuitous suffering. I am not saying that God does allow or inflict gratuitious suffering (as you know, this point is fiercly debated), but I don't think "Maybe God is a sadist, but at least he created you!" is a very strong defense.
Post a Comment
2 comments:
On the pinkgoat your mom told me that you surprised them with the dvd and she was scared speechless. :)
Sounds like a party
Post a Comment