God does not have emotions in the way that humans think of emotions, where emotions are defined as strong feelings. God has what one needs to think of as perfect appropriate responses to human activities. God is beyond complete understanding, but it is important that you be on the right path toward understanding him truthfully, rather than think you understand him and are on a completely wrong path of supposed insight. So I thought of this analogy (of course!)
When I say that God has "perfect appropriate responses" this is what I am trying to say. Since God is total perfection, his "emotional" response to anything that a human does (or anything else) is perfect for the situation. God "feels" only what is entirely truthful and authentic and correct to feel, regardless of the situation, since obviously there is no situation in heaven or in the God created universe, all of which were created by God, that he does not already have complete insight regarding. Thus God has "emotions" that humans sometimes observe, but what they are is the perfect appropriate response that God give to a situation, even if the humans who observe God's response don't fully understand it. But do not kid yourselves. If you read the scriptures you will notice that people are rarely actually "puzzled" or "dumbfounded" by God's reactions... people can pretty much understand in advance when God is wrathful or when God is pleased, since Biblical people pretty much knew full well what to expect. So here is the analogy I thought of to help modern people understand God's "feelings" better.
Suppose that you lived in a city that had one courthouse and one judge, and that judge always rendered perfect justice. In other words, the judge never made a mistake in any case brought before him. Here's how to understand God's wrath. Imagine that a person drags an innocent person off the street, into the courthouse, and right in front of the judge shoots the innocent person dead. The judge would be wrathful but not with the tinges of human anger. That perfect judge, who has already rendered perfect judgment to all types of cases would not be, like a human, "angry," "shocked," or "scared." The judge's reaction would be wrath. Wrath is also called "righteous anger," because it is a combination of indignation at unjust behavior combined with the perfect comprehension of what happened, all the implications and having the perfect "final say" in what happens to punish that person.
Because God is all knowing, whenever a person sins or is unjust, it is as if that sinning or unjust person dragged a innocent person in front of God the judge and shot the person, and one better be prepared for God's wrath, either immediately (on the spot justice, which means during one's life) or deferred wrath (which means upon the person's death and judgment).
So that is how to understand in Biblical times and in present times God's "anger," which is really wrath. It means that it is punishment time, either immediate or delayed, for the sins and injustice that God, as judge, always observes since he is all knowing. People who think God does not see and know all sins and all injustice are like the person in the analogy who drags an innocent person before the perfect judge and shoots him right in his presence, doing so either for shock effect, terrorism, or because he actually thinks he is better than the judge and is showing the judge "how to get things done." God is always present and God already knows all the circumstances around every thought and deed of humans, and thus there is no defiance or shock value one can manipulate before God. Further, God, like the judge in the analogy, is going to render perfect justice regardless if the crime is done in an anger inducing way by a human or not.
When you understand that, you can more fully appreciate how often God holds back his wrath, deferring it, allowing some time (but not as much as you think) for repentance and conversion of the heart and soul back to God. You also can understand why God "doesn't seem angry" because "he allows the wicked to flourish," but then those wicked find out just how "angry" God "really is" because they all wake up in hell when they die.
So God does not get "angry" like humans do for imagined or real slights, out of fear or shock, or vengeance, or jealousy, or even what some imagine to be good reasons to be angry (like being in war, for example). God is only "angry" when a person sins or is unjust (and that includes sins of neglect, meaning they are not doing the honorable things in service to God and in charity that they should be doing.)
You can also use this analogy to understand how God can be "sad," "grieved," be "aggrieved" or have a "grievance." You see how flexible the root concept of grief/grievance is, because it means both grief as in sadness, and grievance as in having a complaint. Complaint is a similar word, where one may complain over an inconvenience, but to be "plaintive" is to be sad (as in plaintive music). God cannot be sad in the way that humans are because humans are sad when they are in a situation that cannot be changed, while God is the source of all help and so he is never in a situation he cannot "change." So God can grieve but he is not sad. Here's how to use the analogy to understand it.
Suppose that after the shooting is done in the analogy courtroom, the bystanders suddenly realize that the innocent person who was dragged in front of the judge and shot was the child of the judge himself. A human judge would of course feel unbelievable sadness and grief at having his child murdered in front of him, because that child is now dead and gone. God, though, receives that child "on the other side," in heaven, and thus God is not sad the way the human judge would be because God "fixes it." God is not stuck with being "without" the child because of course the child is now in heaven. The human judge would be remaining stuck in sadness, however, because he is now without his beloved child. So for a human sadness is added to anger, while for God sadness is not added to his righteous wrath.
However, both God and the human judge in the analogy would both feel grief. How to understand grief? Grief is what happens when one has to now tell the grandparents, the mother, the siblings, the cousins, and the friends that the child has been killed. Grief is seeing the sadness that others must endure because of that action. This is why St Paul in Ephesians warns not to grieve the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not made sad, but feels grief.
Now, to expand on the analogy to better understand God and especially grief, which he manifests, for lack of a better word, through the Holy Spirit. Suppose the innocent person who was murdered was not a child and perhaps not even a good person. Suppose the innocent person was a sinner or an evil doer, or an unbeliever. God would still feel grief for that person even though that person does not count among those who are saved and going to heaven. Why? Because only God takes no joy in injustice, whether against good people or "bad" people because it tarnishes in the darkness of sin both the person who performs the injustice and it cuts short the chance for the so called "bad" person to be redeemed. I say "only God" because just about every person I know succumbs to temptation to gloat at injustice if that injustice happens to someone "who deserves it." Some of the most unspiritual people I know like to post "karma is a bitch," because they are already gloating at a hopeful injustice happening in the future to catch up with an unjust person. In other words, the Bible warns that one will "reap what one sows," but that is different from an almost pagan hope that something bad will "happen" in the future, unrelated, to "make up for" something "bad" the person did in the past. That is trying to justify injustice with another injustice, a very unspiritual and incorrect take on reaping what one sows.
Anyway, remember, God knows the future, not only what will happen but all that could have happened. God knows if, for example, the innocent but sinful person who was killed in that analogy would have someday repented his or her ways and had been converted in heart and saved. But due to the injustice of the murderer that person's life ended and he or she receives perfect judgment, resulting in hell, if that be the case. The Holy Spirit grieves 1) at any injustice because it is against the good ways of God that God has enjoined upon humans 2) at the person who is not saved and goes to hell and 3) at the besmirching of the soul of the person who perpetrates the injustice. The Holy Spirit is not "sad" because as I said, God dispenses all perfect justice (both comfort and punishment) and thus is not ever in the helpless situation of sadness. The Holy Spirit of God does, most assuredly, feel deep grief (hence reference in scripture to the groaning of the Holy Spirit). It is not "sadness," it is grief... grief at the wrong road taken by humans, grief at the dirtying of their own and others' souls by humans, and grief at the unnecessary and avoidable chastisement that humans who perform and/or enable injustice must endure.
I hope that you have found this useful to think about and ponder. You can think of God's perspective of "joy" and "satisfaction" also in the way that "sadness" and "grief" were analyzed. Because God is the source of all joy and satisfaction, he does not feel per se those feelings which depend on fluxuating circumstances and processes required to reach those feelings which God already is (not "has" but "is"), but he does feel them, like grief, on behalf of humans in various situations. The one exception is creation, which God as Creator feels indeed as pure satisfaction, not self-satisfied the way humans are, but when God creates because all is good, and thus God is pleased with that. This is why God is able to appreciate a beautiful sunset alongside humans but of course from his perspective of its goodness, not only the aesthetics.
I just thought of a quick way artists can relate. Think of your favorite work of art and the time, either short or long, it took you to develop it. Part of your satisfaction with it is not just the aesthetics of it, which pleases you, but the method and time by which you achieved it. God created the entire universe with less than a sentence of speech, ha, so you can understand how God's aesthetic appreciation is pure as it is centered on its goodness, and not in the effort or cleverness or talent that went into its making. God didn't have to "work hard" to "paint" a perfect sunset. I hope that helps you understand! And "Hi" and "hey" to all the young people. God is not emo :-)
Showing posts with label grieving. Show all posts
Showing posts with label grieving. Show all posts
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Both God and Jesus have roles in judgement
I've noticed there is some confusion among some people based on the completeness of the authority given to Jesus by God to judge all of humankind. Here is a quick way to help you to understand precisely what God does and intends.
Yes, Jesus has complete authority to judge, which he will do at the Second Coming. The Book of Revelation explains that through the eyes of the Apostle John, who is taken to heaven in vision to see some of what will happen in the final days leading up to the Apocalypse and Christ's Return. God remains on his heavenly throne while the world passes away and Jesus judges all, the living and the dead.
However, until that time comes, people have individual lives and they live and they die. Each person is judged on their death by God himself. How do we know this? Again, turn to what seems to be my most cited scripture, Luke 16, where Jesus describes what happens to a rich man who goes to hell.
"There was a rich man who dressed in purple garments and fine linen and dined sumptuously each day. And lying at his door was a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores...When the poor man died, he was carried away by angels to the bosom of Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried, and from the netherworld, where he was in torment, he raised his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. And he cried out, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me. Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am suffering torment in these flames" (Luke 16:19-20, 22-24).
Now, remember that Jesus has a greater point to make in telling this story, this actual event that has happened, so you must read it for both 1) the main point and 2) any other insight one can glean since everything that Jesus said is saying it "as it really is."
Notice that the rich man does not say, "Abraham! HEY! What in the world am I doing in hell? I was a great guy!" The rich man knows exactly why he is there so he does not bother to ask for an explanation, which he already knows (and in fact is gazing on the very reason, his neglect of the poor, suffering and dying Lazarus). This is because God judged that man as he woke up in hell. It's not like there's a kind of courtroom or waiting room where God calls people in and judges each one in a neutral spot in turn. One wakes up from death in the place where one is sent, with the knowledge of God's judgement. Period. The angels escorted the poor man Lazarus, carrying him to heaven. God's judgment was apparent by the fact the angels were taking him to heaven. Likewise God's judgement was apparent and the facts about "why" given into the spiritual heart and mind of the person who ends up in hell. So the first thing that careful reading and trusting that Jesus is precise and truthful and complete in all things reveals is that people die and wake up in either heaven or hell, knowing exactly why they are there, which only God can provide.
The second thing you notice is that Jesus did not say at any point that he, Jesus, was the one who judged Lazarus or the rich man. If that were the case he would have said so, since Jesus' complete ministry is to be open, freely sharing the facts of the Kingdom of God, and he would have told the disciples if he, Jesus, were the one who was already judging each person who died, even before he was alive as Son of Man on earth and before his crucifixion and resurrection. That would have been an extremely important fact to share in the Gospel and Jesus would have done so if that were the case. Indeed, it would have been mind boggling for the disciples to hear that even before Jesus was born to Mary on earth that he was in heaven judging each person who died! So even though Jesus is of course of God and thus eternal, when he speaks of his role of judge and authority to judge whether one goes to heaven or hell he means at the Second Coming.
So when Abraham explains why the rich man cannot have a drop of water, Abraham is not breaking the news to him about why he is in hell, Abraham is explaining the unchangeable rules and conditions, that no aid or comfort will be given to those in hell.
"Abraham replied, 'My child, remember that you received what was good during your lifetime while Lazarus likewise received what was bad; but now he is comforted here, whereas you are tormented. Moreover, between us a great chasm is established to prevent anyone from crossing who might wish to go from our side to yours or from your side to ours" (Luke 16:25-6).
Do you see? If Jesus had judged the rich man, Jesus would have told the disciples that "And I told him during judgement exactly how many times he had ridden past the poor bleeding hungry and dying Lazarus while riding on his horse and then I had told him each and every one of his sins and that's why he's in hell." But Jesus did not do that....God himself did that. Another way that you can understand that it was God and not pre-born Jesus doing the judging is that Jesus mentions that angels carried the poor man Lazarus to heaven, and everyone realizes that God sends angels to do his bidding. For example, when Jesus is praying before the betrayal in Gethsemane, God sends an angel to comfort him; Jesus does not summon angels. He could do so but he never did so, as Jesus and God work in harmony in all things. It is in the Second Coming where Jesus sends angels and judges. Until then it is exactly as it has always been, which is that God himself renders personal individual judgment and the sending of a soul to heaven or hell upon that person's death.
So to continue the reading, the rich man now asks for permission to send Lazarus (and can you see that he still does not "get it," I mean, he's in hell for how he neglected Lazarus in the first place and he's still trying to order Lazarus to go on his errands... the road to hell is pride, pride, pride...) to warn his brothers. Again, if you carefully read this you can glean an important insight. The rich man is not so much wanting to share the sins that got him into hell, but, and this is important, he wants to tell his brothers how bad and final the suffering of hell is!
"He said, 'Then I beg you, father, send him [Lazarus] to my father's house, for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they too come to this place of torment'" (Luke 16:27).
See? It is the horror of hell in its actuality that spurs the rich man to want to warn his brothers. It's not a genuine repentance since he is still trying to get the very poor miserable "beneath his notice" Lazarus, even as he's glorified to heaven, to go back to earth and do his bidding! So it's not like the rich man didn't "realize" "why" he was in hell since he wasn't judged until Abraham "explained" it to him: he knew full well all along since the story does not start out with "Hey! What's that poor bum Lazarus doing in heaven while I've found myself in hell? What gives?" He immediately hits up Lazarus, through Abraham, for a drop of water. This is how you can infer from what Jesus relates are the facts that people are transported, waking up to find themselves in either heaven or hell with full understanding of how and why they were judged to go there by God. Jesus tells the disciples this actual portrayal of heaven and hell and two people who go to their judgement respectively to make the broader point about what God expects regarding charity, but also to explain how the reality of heaven and hell "works." This is why Abraham explained not only the "why" of why he would not given the rich man even a drop of water or send warning to living five brothers, but also the mechanism, the physics, of heaven and hell, where the great chasm prevents any crossing in either direction. So Jesus was providing a moral and lesson in the telling of what actually happened in this case of the judgment of two men, but also describing for the disciples, who of course needed to know, how the reality of hell and the divide between heaven and hell "works."
Since that is Jesus' intention, if Jesus were "already" judging individual human beings upon their death, he would have said so. To use the expression "it goes without saying" that the disciples understood that God had simultaneously rendered/conveyed judgment to each person and had them conveyed to their place of eternity, either heaven or, of course, hell.
So yes, Jesus has all authority and he will Judge. But do not fall into the trap of thinking that upon personal death (not the End of Days when all will die and rise again for judgement) that when one dies one goes into kind of a waiting room area where one can argue one's case in front of stereotype "forgiving and easy going" Jesus. One is BANG! in heaven or hell, receiving simultaneously judgement and full knowledge of the why's from God himself. Simultaneous with being conveyed by the angels to heaven Lazarus would have received the light of God praising him for his belief and comforting him for his suffering with reward in heaven. Simultaneous with waking up in hell, the rich man would have received full knowledge of the why's of his condemnation and judging by God, which we know because as Jesus relates, it's not like the rich man was puzzled at seeing that "loser" Lazarus in heaven with Abraham. No dialogue is wasted in him asking why that is, because he wakes in hell fully knowing how and why God judged him. No, he's just shocked at how truly unbearable, unrelievable and eternal that hell actually is. It is that shock of suffering that makes him want to warn his brothers that ignoring that dirtbag Lazarus and other poor losers like him is a bad idea. In other words, by how the dialogue progresses you can see that if hell were in theory not such a bad place, but not heaven, this guy would never have bothered trying to warn his brothers, since he still doesn't "get" how unrighteous and unjust he was to Lazarus through his neglect. He's solely motivated by how dreadful that hell is and how he truly can't order the peasant around to do his bidding like he did on earth.
That's why, to remind you of a few postings ago, pride is the downfall of MANY who go to hell. Pridefulness, especially putting one's self before God's priorities, IS a grievous sin and merits hell, regardless of the other "good deeds" or whatever.
When one decides that Jesus is one's Lord and Savior, it is not so you can show a membership card to Jesus, because he's not the one checking at the door upon death: it's God. This is why Jesus repeatedly explains he is the "way." Jesus is not saying that he is judging people's entry into heaven. Remember when James and John's mother asked Jesus if he would have them sit at his right and left hand in his kingdom? What did Jesus say? He said that was up to God. Jesus promised them to go prepare the places for them in heaven. Jesus did not say that he would be the judge when they die. Jesus is the way in the sense that if one trusts him to not only save but to be LORD over one's life, then one will pass judgement from God. It is at the End of all Days, at the Apocalypse, at the Second Coming, that all who lived and died in all humanity will resurrect and be judged by Jesus. Until that time each individual person's death and rendering of judgement to heaven or hell is in God the Father's hands.
Finally, another way you can understand this is to recall one of the most insightful, but most subtle and unnoticed, of all the writings of St. Paul.
And do not grieve the holy Spirit of God, with which you were sealed for the day of redemption (Ephesians 4:30).
You see? Here Paul is reminding the readers that the Holy Spirit also partakes in the final judgement! What he is basically saying that if Christians are "All bitterness, fury, anger, shouting, and reviling...along with all malice" (Ephesians 4:30-31) then these Christians risk losing, by giving sadness and grief to the Holy Spirit, the seal which will get them redeemed. This is powerful and serious stuff, people. Again, this is why I must caution you not to allow a kind of video image of Jesus in the waiting room giving easy judgement upon a person's death to delude you that it's not something that can't be lost. One can accept Jesus as one's Savior but if one does not also follow completely his "way" and indeed, going further, grieves the Holy Spirit, if Jesus is not truly Lord, then one is not prepared to be judged favorably by God, who does the judging based on 1) one's belief and 2) one's righteousness, through the guidance and filter of both Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Paul is warning good believers of the early Christian community that they can lose the seal of redemption if they grieve the Holy Spirit through the actions as listed above.
Yes, Jesus has complete authority to judge, which he will do at the Second Coming. The Book of Revelation explains that through the eyes of the Apostle John, who is taken to heaven in vision to see some of what will happen in the final days leading up to the Apocalypse and Christ's Return. God remains on his heavenly throne while the world passes away and Jesus judges all, the living and the dead.
However, until that time comes, people have individual lives and they live and they die. Each person is judged on their death by God himself. How do we know this? Again, turn to what seems to be my most cited scripture, Luke 16, where Jesus describes what happens to a rich man who goes to hell.
"There was a rich man who dressed in purple garments and fine linen and dined sumptuously each day. And lying at his door was a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores...When the poor man died, he was carried away by angels to the bosom of Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried, and from the netherworld, where he was in torment, he raised his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. And he cried out, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me. Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am suffering torment in these flames" (Luke 16:19-20, 22-24).
Now, remember that Jesus has a greater point to make in telling this story, this actual event that has happened, so you must read it for both 1) the main point and 2) any other insight one can glean since everything that Jesus said is saying it "as it really is."
Notice that the rich man does not say, "Abraham! HEY! What in the world am I doing in hell? I was a great guy!" The rich man knows exactly why he is there so he does not bother to ask for an explanation, which he already knows (and in fact is gazing on the very reason, his neglect of the poor, suffering and dying Lazarus). This is because God judged that man as he woke up in hell. It's not like there's a kind of courtroom or waiting room where God calls people in and judges each one in a neutral spot in turn. One wakes up from death in the place where one is sent, with the knowledge of God's judgement. Period. The angels escorted the poor man Lazarus, carrying him to heaven. God's judgment was apparent by the fact the angels were taking him to heaven. Likewise God's judgement was apparent and the facts about "why" given into the spiritual heart and mind of the person who ends up in hell. So the first thing that careful reading and trusting that Jesus is precise and truthful and complete in all things reveals is that people die and wake up in either heaven or hell, knowing exactly why they are there, which only God can provide.
The second thing you notice is that Jesus did not say at any point that he, Jesus, was the one who judged Lazarus or the rich man. If that were the case he would have said so, since Jesus' complete ministry is to be open, freely sharing the facts of the Kingdom of God, and he would have told the disciples if he, Jesus, were the one who was already judging each person who died, even before he was alive as Son of Man on earth and before his crucifixion and resurrection. That would have been an extremely important fact to share in the Gospel and Jesus would have done so if that were the case. Indeed, it would have been mind boggling for the disciples to hear that even before Jesus was born to Mary on earth that he was in heaven judging each person who died! So even though Jesus is of course of God and thus eternal, when he speaks of his role of judge and authority to judge whether one goes to heaven or hell he means at the Second Coming.
So when Abraham explains why the rich man cannot have a drop of water, Abraham is not breaking the news to him about why he is in hell, Abraham is explaining the unchangeable rules and conditions, that no aid or comfort will be given to those in hell.
"Abraham replied, 'My child, remember that you received what was good during your lifetime while Lazarus likewise received what was bad; but now he is comforted here, whereas you are tormented. Moreover, between us a great chasm is established to prevent anyone from crossing who might wish to go from our side to yours or from your side to ours" (Luke 16:25-6).
Do you see? If Jesus had judged the rich man, Jesus would have told the disciples that "And I told him during judgement exactly how many times he had ridden past the poor bleeding hungry and dying Lazarus while riding on his horse and then I had told him each and every one of his sins and that's why he's in hell." But Jesus did not do that....God himself did that. Another way that you can understand that it was God and not pre-born Jesus doing the judging is that Jesus mentions that angels carried the poor man Lazarus to heaven, and everyone realizes that God sends angels to do his bidding. For example, when Jesus is praying before the betrayal in Gethsemane, God sends an angel to comfort him; Jesus does not summon angels. He could do so but he never did so, as Jesus and God work in harmony in all things. It is in the Second Coming where Jesus sends angels and judges. Until then it is exactly as it has always been, which is that God himself renders personal individual judgment and the sending of a soul to heaven or hell upon that person's death.
So to continue the reading, the rich man now asks for permission to send Lazarus (and can you see that he still does not "get it," I mean, he's in hell for how he neglected Lazarus in the first place and he's still trying to order Lazarus to go on his errands... the road to hell is pride, pride, pride...) to warn his brothers. Again, if you carefully read this you can glean an important insight. The rich man is not so much wanting to share the sins that got him into hell, but, and this is important, he wants to tell his brothers how bad and final the suffering of hell is!
"He said, 'Then I beg you, father, send him [Lazarus] to my father's house, for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they too come to this place of torment'" (Luke 16:27).
See? It is the horror of hell in its actuality that spurs the rich man to want to warn his brothers. It's not a genuine repentance since he is still trying to get the very poor miserable "beneath his notice" Lazarus, even as he's glorified to heaven, to go back to earth and do his bidding! So it's not like the rich man didn't "realize" "why" he was in hell since he wasn't judged until Abraham "explained" it to him: he knew full well all along since the story does not start out with "Hey! What's that poor bum Lazarus doing in heaven while I've found myself in hell? What gives?" He immediately hits up Lazarus, through Abraham, for a drop of water. This is how you can infer from what Jesus relates are the facts that people are transported, waking up to find themselves in either heaven or hell with full understanding of how and why they were judged to go there by God. Jesus tells the disciples this actual portrayal of heaven and hell and two people who go to their judgement respectively to make the broader point about what God expects regarding charity, but also to explain how the reality of heaven and hell "works." This is why Abraham explained not only the "why" of why he would not given the rich man even a drop of water or send warning to living five brothers, but also the mechanism, the physics, of heaven and hell, where the great chasm prevents any crossing in either direction. So Jesus was providing a moral and lesson in the telling of what actually happened in this case of the judgment of two men, but also describing for the disciples, who of course needed to know, how the reality of hell and the divide between heaven and hell "works."
Since that is Jesus' intention, if Jesus were "already" judging individual human beings upon their death, he would have said so. To use the expression "it goes without saying" that the disciples understood that God had simultaneously rendered/conveyed judgment to each person and had them conveyed to their place of eternity, either heaven or, of course, hell.
So yes, Jesus has all authority and he will Judge. But do not fall into the trap of thinking that upon personal death (not the End of Days when all will die and rise again for judgement) that when one dies one goes into kind of a waiting room area where one can argue one's case in front of stereotype "forgiving and easy going" Jesus. One is BANG! in heaven or hell, receiving simultaneously judgement and full knowledge of the why's from God himself. Simultaneous with being conveyed by the angels to heaven Lazarus would have received the light of God praising him for his belief and comforting him for his suffering with reward in heaven. Simultaneous with waking up in hell, the rich man would have received full knowledge of the why's of his condemnation and judging by God, which we know because as Jesus relates, it's not like the rich man was puzzled at seeing that "loser" Lazarus in heaven with Abraham. No dialogue is wasted in him asking why that is, because he wakes in hell fully knowing how and why God judged him. No, he's just shocked at how truly unbearable, unrelievable and eternal that hell actually is. It is that shock of suffering that makes him want to warn his brothers that ignoring that dirtbag Lazarus and other poor losers like him is a bad idea. In other words, by how the dialogue progresses you can see that if hell were in theory not such a bad place, but not heaven, this guy would never have bothered trying to warn his brothers, since he still doesn't "get" how unrighteous and unjust he was to Lazarus through his neglect. He's solely motivated by how dreadful that hell is and how he truly can't order the peasant around to do his bidding like he did on earth.
That's why, to remind you of a few postings ago, pride is the downfall of MANY who go to hell. Pridefulness, especially putting one's self before God's priorities, IS a grievous sin and merits hell, regardless of the other "good deeds" or whatever.
When one decides that Jesus is one's Lord and Savior, it is not so you can show a membership card to Jesus, because he's not the one checking at the door upon death: it's God. This is why Jesus repeatedly explains he is the "way." Jesus is not saying that he is judging people's entry into heaven. Remember when James and John's mother asked Jesus if he would have them sit at his right and left hand in his kingdom? What did Jesus say? He said that was up to God. Jesus promised them to go prepare the places for them in heaven. Jesus did not say that he would be the judge when they die. Jesus is the way in the sense that if one trusts him to not only save but to be LORD over one's life, then one will pass judgement from God. It is at the End of all Days, at the Apocalypse, at the Second Coming, that all who lived and died in all humanity will resurrect and be judged by Jesus. Until that time each individual person's death and rendering of judgement to heaven or hell is in God the Father's hands.
Finally, another way you can understand this is to recall one of the most insightful, but most subtle and unnoticed, of all the writings of St. Paul.
And do not grieve the holy Spirit of God, with which you were sealed for the day of redemption (Ephesians 4:30).
You see? Here Paul is reminding the readers that the Holy Spirit also partakes in the final judgement! What he is basically saying that if Christians are "All bitterness, fury, anger, shouting, and reviling...along with all malice" (Ephesians 4:30-31) then these Christians risk losing, by giving sadness and grief to the Holy Spirit, the seal which will get them redeemed. This is powerful and serious stuff, people. Again, this is why I must caution you not to allow a kind of video image of Jesus in the waiting room giving easy judgement upon a person's death to delude you that it's not something that can't be lost. One can accept Jesus as one's Savior but if one does not also follow completely his "way" and indeed, going further, grieves the Holy Spirit, if Jesus is not truly Lord, then one is not prepared to be judged favorably by God, who does the judging based on 1) one's belief and 2) one's righteousness, through the guidance and filter of both Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Paul is warning good believers of the early Christian community that they can lose the seal of redemption if they grieve the Holy Spirit through the actions as listed above.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
The illness of "complicated grief"
Just read a NYT article about it, as it's being considered for inclusion as a defined mental disorder in the DSM. OK, need to get on with some things but quickly, here is a case study to think about, especially young people.
Complicated grief: prolonged grieving after a loss (death in the family) that robs the survivor of their ability to live or their genuine participation in life.
How to cure? First, you need to understand the challenge, about why it is such a real phenomenon, in the human biological, cultural and spiritual (Biblical) context.
Remember what I have explained that romantic love, per se, and the modern parent-child bond is a fraction of what it used to be. Let me explain. When humans lived hand to mouth in subsistance existence, every member of the family had to work for the daily food AND the only way families prospered was to build families with many children. So humans are biologically and spiritually programmed to want to be in stable marriages with lots of kids. Just because much of western society is now prosperous, this does not mean that all those thousands of years of biological and spiritual adaptation now changes.
Bible reference: Reread the short but very powerful passage where Jesus encounters a funeral procession, where a widow has lost her only son. I explained in previous blogs that this could well have meant death for the widow, as only a husband or a son could provide for her. This is one reason Jesus felt such pity for her and promptly raised her son from the dead and restored him to his mother.
Large families and obligations to feed many children are not the "burden" that modern free spirited people seem to think they are: they are a safety need, against too much grief, too much morbidity, too much dead end. Generations of women have emotionally survived the dead of a child, or a spouse, because one had to "keep going" for the rest of the family, and this indeed would bring them out of their deepest grief, even if nothing could of course ultimately heal it. The problem is that a person with complicated grief is not the sick person: the society that no longer has the entended support AND obligations that provide this safety net is the entity who is sick.
So I resist the idea that complicated grief is a person's individual burden; it is the result of society no longer supporting, as it did before, the large stable family AND the necessity of "keeping on or we all suffer" mentality, as both of those heal complicated grief. This is why the modern somewhat manufactured thought of giving the griever "a new purpose in life" (usually through a job or more education) has some merit, but it's a shadow of what actual real life in less prosperous but more populated/per family times offered, not a "new purpose" but continuity in the need to go on. Most families DID suffer the loss of a baby or child in the old days. That's one reason why previous generations did not have "complicated grief," they had reality, which is many families had four or more children, and often one was stillborn, died in infancy or during childbirth, or of illness or poverty at a young age. One suffers less when one is part of what is the normal life experience and with many in the family who are indeed still alive and who need you.
The second thing to think about is that in un-believing, weak faith, or totally God-less times, it is very hard for complicated grief people to move on if they do not at some point embrace with joy, not with sorrow, that their child is with God in heaven and would not come back even if he or she could. Faith is not a sugar pill: it is reality. People with complicated grief have often been robbed by society or in their individual upbringing of not only really believing in heaven, God and their child being their (or their spouse or loved one having hope of being there), but even those who do still believe have a lukewarm perception of the joy and bliss their loved one has in the eternal presence. You must understand that heaven is mind blowing beyond what anyone can imagine. Generations of grieving parents or spouses before were not making lame excuses when they comforted saying "He (or she) is in a better place." The old time believers understood that it is really, really, really, REALLY true. Understanding that reality is the ultimate survivor guilt and other symptom reliever. Again, it is not a sugar pill. It is acknowledgment that heaven, guaranteed for children, hoped for by believing adults, and even those who can only rely on God's mercy as they had rejected him in life, is a place that is so amazing and eternal that no one would want to come back regardless of how much they loved a person who is not there with them at that time.
So complicated grief is another illness of not the individual (though they are suffering the very real pain and symptoms.) It is the illness of society's destruction of large families and of mainstream genuine faith in the reality of God in each person's life and after life in eternity. It's like society has the illness but the complicated grief person is suffering all the symptoms.
I hope you have found this helpful.
Complicated grief: prolonged grieving after a loss (death in the family) that robs the survivor of their ability to live or their genuine participation in life.
How to cure? First, you need to understand the challenge, about why it is such a real phenomenon, in the human biological, cultural and spiritual (Biblical) context.
Remember what I have explained that romantic love, per se, and the modern parent-child bond is a fraction of what it used to be. Let me explain. When humans lived hand to mouth in subsistance existence, every member of the family had to work for the daily food AND the only way families prospered was to build families with many children. So humans are biologically and spiritually programmed to want to be in stable marriages with lots of kids. Just because much of western society is now prosperous, this does not mean that all those thousands of years of biological and spiritual adaptation now changes.
Bible reference: Reread the short but very powerful passage where Jesus encounters a funeral procession, where a widow has lost her only son. I explained in previous blogs that this could well have meant death for the widow, as only a husband or a son could provide for her. This is one reason Jesus felt such pity for her and promptly raised her son from the dead and restored him to his mother.
Large families and obligations to feed many children are not the "burden" that modern free spirited people seem to think they are: they are a safety need, against too much grief, too much morbidity, too much dead end. Generations of women have emotionally survived the dead of a child, or a spouse, because one had to "keep going" for the rest of the family, and this indeed would bring them out of their deepest grief, even if nothing could of course ultimately heal it. The problem is that a person with complicated grief is not the sick person: the society that no longer has the entended support AND obligations that provide this safety net is the entity who is sick.
So I resist the idea that complicated grief is a person's individual burden; it is the result of society no longer supporting, as it did before, the large stable family AND the necessity of "keeping on or we all suffer" mentality, as both of those heal complicated grief. This is why the modern somewhat manufactured thought of giving the griever "a new purpose in life" (usually through a job or more education) has some merit, but it's a shadow of what actual real life in less prosperous but more populated/per family times offered, not a "new purpose" but continuity in the need to go on. Most families DID suffer the loss of a baby or child in the old days. That's one reason why previous generations did not have "complicated grief," they had reality, which is many families had four or more children, and often one was stillborn, died in infancy or during childbirth, or of illness or poverty at a young age. One suffers less when one is part of what is the normal life experience and with many in the family who are indeed still alive and who need you.
The second thing to think about is that in un-believing, weak faith, or totally God-less times, it is very hard for complicated grief people to move on if they do not at some point embrace with joy, not with sorrow, that their child is with God in heaven and would not come back even if he or she could. Faith is not a sugar pill: it is reality. People with complicated grief have often been robbed by society or in their individual upbringing of not only really believing in heaven, God and their child being their (or their spouse or loved one having hope of being there), but even those who do still believe have a lukewarm perception of the joy and bliss their loved one has in the eternal presence. You must understand that heaven is mind blowing beyond what anyone can imagine. Generations of grieving parents or spouses before were not making lame excuses when they comforted saying "He (or she) is in a better place." The old time believers understood that it is really, really, really, REALLY true. Understanding that reality is the ultimate survivor guilt and other symptom reliever. Again, it is not a sugar pill. It is acknowledgment that heaven, guaranteed for children, hoped for by believing adults, and even those who can only rely on God's mercy as they had rejected him in life, is a place that is so amazing and eternal that no one would want to come back regardless of how much they loved a person who is not there with them at that time.
So complicated grief is another illness of not the individual (though they are suffering the very real pain and symptoms.) It is the illness of society's destruction of large families and of mainstream genuine faith in the reality of God in each person's life and after life in eternity. It's like society has the illness but the complicated grief person is suffering all the symptoms.
I hope you have found this helpful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
