This is going to be quick as I want to get going to prayer meeting tonight, but I just thought of this analogy/explanation to get past a stumbling block many encounter when understanding or even believing in God.
I got the realization how I can help with this problem when I started thinking of some anti-religious and anti-God comments in an online news article. They, posted by the usual advocates of non-belief in God etc, took the familiar tack of citing every time God smited or punished someone in the Bible, or encouraged the Israelites to kill and conquer the natives of Canaan, as evidence that God is "mean" or "cruel." Hmm, I've heard this so many times and rather than the usual way of approaching the truthful explanation, here's an analogy.
Suppose you are a parent and someone asks you why you had a child. Suppose you answered them "So I could pay for them going to college." What? That's not even biologically honest, LOL. A parent had a child because 1) they had sex and a child resulted. I mean, that's the bottom line, no? Whether the child is loved or not, wanted or not, treated well or not, the "reason" every parent has a child is that they had sex with someone who was fertile. Duh!
One would never explain that one had a child by giving the questioner a snapshot of what you are doing with that child in the present moment, in this analogy, paying for a college education.
When one tries to understand God by citing difficult to understand actions that occur well along in the relationship between God and humans, one is making the same error. The only way to understand God (and even the "bad" parts of the relationship) which is to start in the beginning, which is love. You must understand God by understanding his foundation with human beings is love.
The proof is in the existence of both the angels and first humans, Adam and Eve. God did not create the angels so that he could have difficulty with them later. He created them, let them choose to serve or not, and those who chose not to serve him followed their leader, Lucifer, to the world, and to their abode hell. (Notice Lucifer spends very little time in hell, since he wanders the earth, while the others are all stuck in hell). So God created unbelievably immense numbers of angels (beyond quadrillions of them) out of love, not because he wanted to combat with the handful that refused to serve him.
Likewise Adam and Eve were created and God made known in his understandable true form to them for love and companionship. It was a fertile relationship, like the angels, where the fertility is love. God did not create humans so he could boss them around, be mean to them, or play games with them, or to have to pay for their college (!)
So whenever someone (maybe yourself) is tempted to try to understand God by starting out with listing with your own righteous indignation all the "bad" and "mean" things God did, and thus must supposedly be, and hence just a trick to make humans obey law and doesn't really exist, think of my analogy to bail you out of that error in mindset and time frames. Did a parent have a child just so he or she could pay tens of thousands of dollars to a college someday? That's what they had in mind when the baby was conceived? "Hey, I want to give $50,000 to NYU, so let's have a baby and send the baby to NYU!" Duh, no. God created angels and humans out of the fertile and mutual love that God is in his totality of existence. Listing the hardships, "payments" and "mean discipline" that God rendered later hardly begins to truly enlighten anyone to God's true nature.
I hope you have found this helpful! (Hi young friends, always thinking of you...)
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
So many believe false identities
One of the largest and most spirit crushing ways that the past several generations have been cheated and deluded is the growing belief that people are more than what they actually are. By wanting to believe that one is "more" than one's own individual personality, rather than gaining, one only loses what one actually has.
When I say that people believe they are more than they actually are, I am referring for the most part to three false beliefs: 1) they are reincarnated, since there is, as I've blogged before, no such thing as reincarnation, period 2) they are "aliens," which is also totally false and is nothing other than the human temptation to diminish God's creation, humans and animals, by believing there must be something "better" or "more advanced" "out there," and 3) that one has a divine purpose, role, "channel" to the heavens or whatever, which again is simply a temptation of inflation, of trying to be more than one really is.
What is so sad is that such beliefs take away from, rather than enhance, the glory of the individual true life that is genuinely lived.
For example, when I read obituaries of people I suspect have had these beliefs, I think how sad that it is that anything good they did they attributed at least in part to other forces rather than themselves, living in God's creation. They weren't simply a fine sailor or a great adventurer through their own gifts, talents, hard work and merits, they are "channeling" "space aliens." I cannot begin to explain to you, at least not in writing, how sad this makes me and has for many years, since I first realized how widespread these delusions are. I would say it has contributed to making me, a previously joyful soul, mournful, as I mourn all these false beliefs, which poisoned not only the person's life, but those they taught and raised around them.
Do you not want to feel good after engineering a superb project or machinery that you did it through your own merit (and your team's) using God given reality based resources of this earth, rather than imagine that you are some half backed supposedly reincarnated alien alchemist? And if you make a mistake, or something does not turn out as you hoped, how does it actually console you, since it does not, to believe that you are "held back" because of your own "karma" or blame it on someone else's supposed lack of spirituality or "influence" on you? THAT makes you feel better? THAT makes you more successful? Rather than practicing some more, or seeking help, you believe that evil alien spirits tripped you up? How constructive is that? And what a way to raise the next generation... if being lemmings running over a cliff is your intention, for self destruction, that sure is an effective way to do it.
In the 1960's and 1970's I looked at the world around me and became very concerned about not only the level of sinfulness and loss of faith/understanding in the true only God, and the material world as it actually exists, in all its beauty and potential, but also what I viewed as a wave of global neurosis. During those twenty years I watched large groups of the population, particularly in the better developed "West" become incredible neurotics. That was bad enough, and very alarming.
However, during the 1980's and 1990's I watched the world get much worse, and go from global neurosis to global psychosis. Many of the people of the world today are psychotic, and I do not mean in the classic clinical sense of having an individual psychotic illness or break. Since psychosis is by definition an inability to discern reality from fiction, the true from the false, individuals and society as a whole has become remarkably and I often fear irretrievably psychotic. One of the hallmarks of psychosis is the inability to see the harm that comes from abandoning truth and instead, calling manipulation "reality." I could easily tap my microphone here and say "People of the world, you have already surrendered much of your sanity, and have institutionalized and even become enslaved to unreality and psychosis."
Drugs and alcohol have broken the sanity and discernment of many of the people who with their God given genuine and real caring and talents were supposed to make this a better world, who were supposed to be loving stewards, who were supposed to teach and protect their children, who were supposed to be genuine leaders.
Instead they put on their freak show uniforms and pretend to be heroes of epic bull crap that exists only in their own minds, destroying even their own joy in their own genuine achievements. Few things make me sadder than listening to a wonderful piece of music and knowing that it was written by someone inserting depressive and false cult beliefs as he or she mourns or condemns people, actions, events that never ever happened.
Instead of believing in the one true God, the one they will have to face at their time of judgment, they either deny God or appoint themselves as "knowing" the "reality" of "divine forces" and at best they view belief in God or "accepting" Jesus Christ as an insurance policy menu choice.
But this is not a "reality of hell" rant, no, not today, not now. This is sharing some of the decades of mourning that I have in my heart for how people have destroyed their own sanity and thus have no satisfaction in anything in their lives since they attribute it all, good or bad, to false reasons and false influences.
Here's an example, I'm just making it up, of how I've seen this decay happen.
Normal behavior: A kid grows up with some interest, perhaps in sharks, perhaps in model ships. There's no real rhyme or reason why they have that interest, it just is part of how each person has different things and different callings.
Neurotic generations: A kid has interests in sharks or model ships and either he or she or the parents/school system worries about "why" they are interested in such things. Why sharks and not tigers? Why ship building and not farming? Does little Johnny or Susie have "appropriate" interests that will give them lots of money when they grow up?
Psychotic generations: Johnny is interested in sharks because in a past life he was a shark, being "punished" for previous karma imbalance. Susie likes ship building because an alien reincarnated spirit in her years to be free and defeat the forthcoming bad alien menace and usher in the good alien "rescue."
I wish I was joking or overstating, but you know that I am not doing so, by far.
Individual and societal neurosis saps the pleasure from life, and also makes people feel helpless to address genuine failure and injustice where it exists and when it does happen.
Individual and societal psychosis is a total system of slavery that leads to destruction of life and soul, no matter how glistening and gleaming the self delusional world seems because it just simply is not reality. Unthinkable evil is routinely done under the guise of "good deeds." It ends when it is too late and people have ruined their own lives and others, and then are cast into the pit upon their deaths.
When I say that people believe they are more than they actually are, I am referring for the most part to three false beliefs: 1) they are reincarnated, since there is, as I've blogged before, no such thing as reincarnation, period 2) they are "aliens," which is also totally false and is nothing other than the human temptation to diminish God's creation, humans and animals, by believing there must be something "better" or "more advanced" "out there," and 3) that one has a divine purpose, role, "channel" to the heavens or whatever, which again is simply a temptation of inflation, of trying to be more than one really is.
What is so sad is that such beliefs take away from, rather than enhance, the glory of the individual true life that is genuinely lived.
For example, when I read obituaries of people I suspect have had these beliefs, I think how sad that it is that anything good they did they attributed at least in part to other forces rather than themselves, living in God's creation. They weren't simply a fine sailor or a great adventurer through their own gifts, talents, hard work and merits, they are "channeling" "space aliens." I cannot begin to explain to you, at least not in writing, how sad this makes me and has for many years, since I first realized how widespread these delusions are. I would say it has contributed to making me, a previously joyful soul, mournful, as I mourn all these false beliefs, which poisoned not only the person's life, but those they taught and raised around them.
Do you not want to feel good after engineering a superb project or machinery that you did it through your own merit (and your team's) using God given reality based resources of this earth, rather than imagine that you are some half backed supposedly reincarnated alien alchemist? And if you make a mistake, or something does not turn out as you hoped, how does it actually console you, since it does not, to believe that you are "held back" because of your own "karma" or blame it on someone else's supposed lack of spirituality or "influence" on you? THAT makes you feel better? THAT makes you more successful? Rather than practicing some more, or seeking help, you believe that evil alien spirits tripped you up? How constructive is that? And what a way to raise the next generation... if being lemmings running over a cliff is your intention, for self destruction, that sure is an effective way to do it.
In the 1960's and 1970's I looked at the world around me and became very concerned about not only the level of sinfulness and loss of faith/understanding in the true only God, and the material world as it actually exists, in all its beauty and potential, but also what I viewed as a wave of global neurosis. During those twenty years I watched large groups of the population, particularly in the better developed "West" become incredible neurotics. That was bad enough, and very alarming.
However, during the 1980's and 1990's I watched the world get much worse, and go from global neurosis to global psychosis. Many of the people of the world today are psychotic, and I do not mean in the classic clinical sense of having an individual psychotic illness or break. Since psychosis is by definition an inability to discern reality from fiction, the true from the false, individuals and society as a whole has become remarkably and I often fear irretrievably psychotic. One of the hallmarks of psychosis is the inability to see the harm that comes from abandoning truth and instead, calling manipulation "reality." I could easily tap my microphone here and say "People of the world, you have already surrendered much of your sanity, and have institutionalized and even become enslaved to unreality and psychosis."
Drugs and alcohol have broken the sanity and discernment of many of the people who with their God given genuine and real caring and talents were supposed to make this a better world, who were supposed to be loving stewards, who were supposed to teach and protect their children, who were supposed to be genuine leaders.
Instead they put on their freak show uniforms and pretend to be heroes of epic bull crap that exists only in their own minds, destroying even their own joy in their own genuine achievements. Few things make me sadder than listening to a wonderful piece of music and knowing that it was written by someone inserting depressive and false cult beliefs as he or she mourns or condemns people, actions, events that never ever happened.
Instead of believing in the one true God, the one they will have to face at their time of judgment, they either deny God or appoint themselves as "knowing" the "reality" of "divine forces" and at best they view belief in God or "accepting" Jesus Christ as an insurance policy menu choice.
But this is not a "reality of hell" rant, no, not today, not now. This is sharing some of the decades of mourning that I have in my heart for how people have destroyed their own sanity and thus have no satisfaction in anything in their lives since they attribute it all, good or bad, to false reasons and false influences.
Here's an example, I'm just making it up, of how I've seen this decay happen.
Normal behavior: A kid grows up with some interest, perhaps in sharks, perhaps in model ships. There's no real rhyme or reason why they have that interest, it just is part of how each person has different things and different callings.
Neurotic generations: A kid has interests in sharks or model ships and either he or she or the parents/school system worries about "why" they are interested in such things. Why sharks and not tigers? Why ship building and not farming? Does little Johnny or Susie have "appropriate" interests that will give them lots of money when they grow up?
Psychotic generations: Johnny is interested in sharks because in a past life he was a shark, being "punished" for previous karma imbalance. Susie likes ship building because an alien reincarnated spirit in her years to be free and defeat the forthcoming bad alien menace and usher in the good alien "rescue."
I wish I was joking or overstating, but you know that I am not doing so, by far.
Individual and societal neurosis saps the pleasure from life, and also makes people feel helpless to address genuine failure and injustice where it exists and when it does happen.
Individual and societal psychosis is a total system of slavery that leads to destruction of life and soul, no matter how glistening and gleaming the self delusional world seems because it just simply is not reality. Unthinkable evil is routinely done under the guise of "good deeds." It ends when it is too late and people have ruined their own lives and others, and then are cast into the pit upon their deaths.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Bible Reading: 1 Machabees 4:36-51
Just to give you some context, this is a historical book that centers around the history of the Jews while under the command of Judas Machabeus and his brethren. The Jews were persecuted and occupied by a number of invaders, and Rome was on the horizon, though they were not yet conquered by Rome. The scripture I am including here describes how the Jews recaptured a holy place and see the desecration that had taken place, and how they respond. These events are less than two hundred years before Jesus was born.
1 Machabees 4:36-51
Then Judas and his brethren said: Behold our enemies are discomfited. Let us go up now to cleanse the holy places and to repair them. And all the army assembled together, and they went up into mount Sion.
And they saw the sanctuary desolate, and the altar profaned, and the gates burnt, and shrubs growing up in the courts as in a forest or on the mountains, and the chambers joining to the temple thrown down.
And they rent their garments, and made great lamentation, and put ashes on their heads, and they fell down to the ground on their faces, and they sounded with the trumpets of alarms, and they cried towards heaven.
Then Judas appointed men to fight against them that were in the castle, till they had cleansed the holy places. And he chose priests without blemish, whose will was set upon the law of God: and they cleansed the holy places, and took away the stones that had been defiled into an unclean place.
And he considered about the altar of holocausts that had been profaned, what he should do with it. And a good counsel [remember counsel is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit] came into their minds to pull it down, lest it should be a reproach to them, because the Gentiles had defiled it; so they threw it down.
And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them. And they took whole stones according to the law, and built a new altar according to the former. And they built up the holy places, and the things that were within the temple, and they sanctified the temple and the courts.
And they made new holy vessels, and brought in the candlestick, and the altar of incense, and the table into the temple. And they put incense upon the altar, and lighted up the lamps that were upon the candlestick, and they gave light in the temple. And they set the loaves upon the table, and hung up the veils, and finished all the works they had begun to make.
This is one of my favorite passages in the Bible that deals with historical events. There are several reasons I love how these events were recorded in the scripture, which Catholics consider part of the sacred canon of the Bible, while Jews (who do celebrate the memory of these events in their sacred calendar) and Protestants do not consider it part of the canon. The first reason that I love this passage is that it allows the reader over two thousand years later to look over the shoulders of these soldiers and witness their response when they see how their holy places and God's house were profaned. Soldiers were extremely pious. They were distraught at the profanity they had found.
Second they then get down to business and restore the sanctity of the place. Again one is able to look over the shoulder of the leader, Judas, as he considers how to handle the resanctification of the holy place. Here is a mention of the Holy Spirit giving him counsel, advising him to tear down the sacred altar because having been profaned it cannot remain as it is without being a blemish and a shame to those who would worship there. At the same time, though, Judas realizes that deciding what to do with the removed stones of the altar is beyond him or anyone alive among the Jews, and so they put the stones aside "till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them."
This shows two things. One is that the Jews continued to have faith that God would send a prophet when it is time, and so even though it had been very long since a prophet had arisen from God among the people, with confidence they put aside this complex and thorny decision for the next prophet. Secondly it shows their great humility. No one pushed forward and declared themselves to be "wise" enough to know what to do with the profaned stones, or claim to be "channeling" God (yikes) as we see so often today among the multitude of false prophets abroad around the globe. This is why I share this passage with you because it is a crucial part of understanding a genuine relationship with God.
Another thing I love is the loving care where they record how they sanctify and restore the temple, the courts and the altar. They understand that this is God's home, because wherever an altar is sanctified to him, God commits that his presence is there.
I hope you have enjoyed this reading and come to love it as much as I do. And remember that though they did not live to see it, around one hundred and fifty years after these events a prophet came to the Jews indeed, however he was the Messiah himself, Jesus Christ.
Oh, and here is something else to share with you. Chapters four and five describe how Judas fights against all the various oppressors, retaking lands that had been captured. On one particular day this is written:
1 Machabees 5:67
In that day some priests fell in battle, while desiring to do manfully they went out unadvisedly to fight.
This is just information about what had happened, not a hidden message or exhortation about the role of priests. But it does tell you, if you want to understand Biblical times better, that while no one stopped priests from fighting with the army, it was a very rare event because priests are the precious role of serving God and are not, in general, considered as military resources. Lest anyone imagine a role of "fighting priest," I include this passage to show you there is no Biblical justification for warrior priests at all.
1 Machabees 4:36-51
Then Judas and his brethren said: Behold our enemies are discomfited. Let us go up now to cleanse the holy places and to repair them. And all the army assembled together, and they went up into mount Sion.
And they saw the sanctuary desolate, and the altar profaned, and the gates burnt, and shrubs growing up in the courts as in a forest or on the mountains, and the chambers joining to the temple thrown down.
And they rent their garments, and made great lamentation, and put ashes on their heads, and they fell down to the ground on their faces, and they sounded with the trumpets of alarms, and they cried towards heaven.
Then Judas appointed men to fight against them that were in the castle, till they had cleansed the holy places. And he chose priests without blemish, whose will was set upon the law of God: and they cleansed the holy places, and took away the stones that had been defiled into an unclean place.
And he considered about the altar of holocausts that had been profaned, what he should do with it. And a good counsel [remember counsel is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit] came into their minds to pull it down, lest it should be a reproach to them, because the Gentiles had defiled it; so they threw it down.
And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them. And they took whole stones according to the law, and built a new altar according to the former. And they built up the holy places, and the things that were within the temple, and they sanctified the temple and the courts.
And they made new holy vessels, and brought in the candlestick, and the altar of incense, and the table into the temple. And they put incense upon the altar, and lighted up the lamps that were upon the candlestick, and they gave light in the temple. And they set the loaves upon the table, and hung up the veils, and finished all the works they had begun to make.
This is one of my favorite passages in the Bible that deals with historical events. There are several reasons I love how these events were recorded in the scripture, which Catholics consider part of the sacred canon of the Bible, while Jews (who do celebrate the memory of these events in their sacred calendar) and Protestants do not consider it part of the canon. The first reason that I love this passage is that it allows the reader over two thousand years later to look over the shoulders of these soldiers and witness their response when they see how their holy places and God's house were profaned. Soldiers were extremely pious. They were distraught at the profanity they had found.
Second they then get down to business and restore the sanctity of the place. Again one is able to look over the shoulder of the leader, Judas, as he considers how to handle the resanctification of the holy place. Here is a mention of the Holy Spirit giving him counsel, advising him to tear down the sacred altar because having been profaned it cannot remain as it is without being a blemish and a shame to those who would worship there. At the same time, though, Judas realizes that deciding what to do with the removed stones of the altar is beyond him or anyone alive among the Jews, and so they put the stones aside "till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them."
This shows two things. One is that the Jews continued to have faith that God would send a prophet when it is time, and so even though it had been very long since a prophet had arisen from God among the people, with confidence they put aside this complex and thorny decision for the next prophet. Secondly it shows their great humility. No one pushed forward and declared themselves to be "wise" enough to know what to do with the profaned stones, or claim to be "channeling" God (yikes) as we see so often today among the multitude of false prophets abroad around the globe. This is why I share this passage with you because it is a crucial part of understanding a genuine relationship with God.
Another thing I love is the loving care where they record how they sanctify and restore the temple, the courts and the altar. They understand that this is God's home, because wherever an altar is sanctified to him, God commits that his presence is there.
I hope you have enjoyed this reading and come to love it as much as I do. And remember that though they did not live to see it, around one hundred and fifty years after these events a prophet came to the Jews indeed, however he was the Messiah himself, Jesus Christ.
Oh, and here is something else to share with you. Chapters four and five describe how Judas fights against all the various oppressors, retaking lands that had been captured. On one particular day this is written:
1 Machabees 5:67
In that day some priests fell in battle, while desiring to do manfully they went out unadvisedly to fight.
This is just information about what had happened, not a hidden message or exhortation about the role of priests. But it does tell you, if you want to understand Biblical times better, that while no one stopped priests from fighting with the army, it was a very rare event because priests are the precious role of serving God and are not, in general, considered as military resources. Lest anyone imagine a role of "fighting priest," I include this passage to show you there is no Biblical justification for warrior priests at all.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Catholics may need to "Atlas Shrug"
Ayn Rand is known for her rather goofy opus called "Atlas Shrugged," where industrialists, feeling "unappreciated," eventually "go on strike" and "disappear," until ungrateful society begs them to "return." This was, needless to say, a quite godless and unspiritual book, but generations have found it fascinating, and that's cool.
It occurs to me that the Roman Catholic Church needs to borrow a leaf from "Atlas Shrugged" and simply walk away from many of the social services programs that they have in place. Why do I feel this way? For three reasons:
1. In progressive and anti-Catholic or anti-Christian governments there is pressure on Catholic charities to loosen their doctrine in return for continuing to receive government money. My advice: walk away from those programs totally. Let them give the money to someone else to do their "social programs" their way. It is a blessing in disguise as the Church can concentrate its mission on what is central: the saving of souls and the transmission of solid faith formation.
2. I obviously do not feel this way in the truly needy populations of the world where the Catholic Church provides vital and often willfully invisible (as in pointedly ignored by the media) services to the most dire of the sick and the poor. So shift the resources that Catholics give from the ungrateful areas (that obviously have "other sources") to those who are truly thankful and in need. It only makes sense. If you give the same gift every Christmas to two sons, and one thanks you and the other punches you in the face, I would suggest giving both gifts to the son who thanks you.
3. The world is not starved for social services programs; it is starved for sanctity and prayer. I think the Catholic Church needs to downsize its social involvement, even where it is sad and painful to do so, in order to return to prayerful and dedicated attention to the sacraments, education and overall sanctity. Downsize and refocus the mission. That way all those critics of the Catholic Church will have to change from criticizing the way we conducted our social programs to criticizing us for not having enough social programs. That would be cool, like bonus points, to the main purpose which is to refocus on the sacred work.
Jesus Christ brought God, not a soup kitchen community organizer. Plenty of charity can indeed and must be done through individual, congregation and community involvement, but I believe the time for us to lead large social programs is over when so many don't give a flying you know what if we do AND seek to erode them and use them as ways to whip up hatred against the Catholic Church.
I say, take the money we use in social programs in the higher developed countries and regions and instead reallocate and devote them to the formation of priests and other religious. Hey, isn't that what everyone is saying we ought to do? "Clean up" all those "bad priests?" Save an altar boy?
Not to minimize at all, as my regular readers know, my zero tolerance for sexual and other abuse or emotionally predatory behavior. So don't waste my time thinking I'm not condemning all abuse in the strongest terms, as I have all along.
But it has come to the point where not a single article about anything good, bad, or neutral can appear in the press without hate mongers commenting about sodomy and rape and buggering and whatever. So I say make them happy and withdraw from all social programs ALL of them in the better developed areas of the world and let them find "alternative providers." Use the social services program funding to "clean up all those pedophiles," you know, all the ones who flock to the Catholic Church. Yep, let's do that. Take the money from the social programs and use them for priest and religious formation. Seriously, as we all know the aging population of faithful religious live in great poverty and often in worse conditions than the people they dedicated their lives to serving.
I'd like to see the Catholic Church just walk away from MANY of the social services programs and instead invest those alms that are donated and income that is generated by the church toward inward, prayerful places and people of sanctity.
Ta ta I say. What say you? I think that would be music to the ears of those who demean all the Catholic Church has done. Win-win, then, no?
It occurs to me that the Roman Catholic Church needs to borrow a leaf from "Atlas Shrugged" and simply walk away from many of the social services programs that they have in place. Why do I feel this way? For three reasons:
1. In progressive and anti-Catholic or anti-Christian governments there is pressure on Catholic charities to loosen their doctrine in return for continuing to receive government money. My advice: walk away from those programs totally. Let them give the money to someone else to do their "social programs" their way. It is a blessing in disguise as the Church can concentrate its mission on what is central: the saving of souls and the transmission of solid faith formation.
2. I obviously do not feel this way in the truly needy populations of the world where the Catholic Church provides vital and often willfully invisible (as in pointedly ignored by the media) services to the most dire of the sick and the poor. So shift the resources that Catholics give from the ungrateful areas (that obviously have "other sources") to those who are truly thankful and in need. It only makes sense. If you give the same gift every Christmas to two sons, and one thanks you and the other punches you in the face, I would suggest giving both gifts to the son who thanks you.
3. The world is not starved for social services programs; it is starved for sanctity and prayer. I think the Catholic Church needs to downsize its social involvement, even where it is sad and painful to do so, in order to return to prayerful and dedicated attention to the sacraments, education and overall sanctity. Downsize and refocus the mission. That way all those critics of the Catholic Church will have to change from criticizing the way we conducted our social programs to criticizing us for not having enough social programs. That would be cool, like bonus points, to the main purpose which is to refocus on the sacred work.
Jesus Christ brought God, not a soup kitchen community organizer. Plenty of charity can indeed and must be done through individual, congregation and community involvement, but I believe the time for us to lead large social programs is over when so many don't give a flying you know what if we do AND seek to erode them and use them as ways to whip up hatred against the Catholic Church.
I say, take the money we use in social programs in the higher developed countries and regions and instead reallocate and devote them to the formation of priests and other religious. Hey, isn't that what everyone is saying we ought to do? "Clean up" all those "bad priests?" Save an altar boy?
Not to minimize at all, as my regular readers know, my zero tolerance for sexual and other abuse or emotionally predatory behavior. So don't waste my time thinking I'm not condemning all abuse in the strongest terms, as I have all along.
But it has come to the point where not a single article about anything good, bad, or neutral can appear in the press without hate mongers commenting about sodomy and rape and buggering and whatever. So I say make them happy and withdraw from all social programs ALL of them in the better developed areas of the world and let them find "alternative providers." Use the social services program funding to "clean up all those pedophiles," you know, all the ones who flock to the Catholic Church. Yep, let's do that. Take the money from the social programs and use them for priest and religious formation. Seriously, as we all know the aging population of faithful religious live in great poverty and often in worse conditions than the people they dedicated their lives to serving.
I'd like to see the Catholic Church just walk away from MANY of the social services programs and instead invest those alms that are donated and income that is generated by the church toward inward, prayerful places and people of sanctity.
Ta ta I say. What say you? I think that would be music to the ears of those who demean all the Catholic Church has done. Win-win, then, no?
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Bible Reading: Luke 23:33-34
What the Bible says:
Luke 23:33-34
And when they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him there, and the robbers, one on his right hand and the other on his left. And Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." Now in dividing his garments they cast lots.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary):
And then the skies parted and God said, "Oh, well, then OK! I forgive all these people who are torturing, mocking and now killing you. Carry on with the crucifixion since Jesus asked Me to forgive all of you, go right on ahead with what you are doing."
God does not grant all of Jesus' requests.
What the Bible says:
Luke 22:42-43
Saying, "Father, if thou art willing, remove this cup from me; yet not my will but thy be done." And there appeared to him an angel from heaven to strengthen him. And falling into an agony he prayed the more earnestly.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary)
And the angel who comforted Jesus said, "Psst! Keep it secret but God has granted your request and you are not going to be betrayed, arrested and crucified. We are just totally faking them out and Judas was just part of the punking reality show."
Only God decides regarding forgiveness. I don't know how so many people today think that if they can get a victim to "forgive them" that God will automatically do so. Further, I don't know how so many people today think that because Jesus asked God to forgive his tormentors and killers that God automatically did so. That is why I included the second passage to show that immediately before the request for forgiveness by Jesus and his crucifixion, Jesus asked something else of God which was denied. An angel was sent to comfort him, so God of course heard Jesus' prayer, but God did not grant his request to remove the cup of suffering from Jesus. That would not be done until Jesus had died and resurrected, and will himself pass judgment on humans with great strictness at the Second Coming.
Luke 23:33-34
And when they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him there, and the robbers, one on his right hand and the other on his left. And Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." Now in dividing his garments they cast lots.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary):
And then the skies parted and God said, "Oh, well, then OK! I forgive all these people who are torturing, mocking and now killing you. Carry on with the crucifixion since Jesus asked Me to forgive all of you, go right on ahead with what you are doing."
God does not grant all of Jesus' requests.
What the Bible says:
Luke 22:42-43
Saying, "Father, if thou art willing, remove this cup from me; yet not my will but thy be done." And there appeared to him an angel from heaven to strengthen him. And falling into an agony he prayed the more earnestly.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary)
And the angel who comforted Jesus said, "Psst! Keep it secret but God has granted your request and you are not going to be betrayed, arrested and crucified. We are just totally faking them out and Judas was just part of the punking reality show."
Only God decides regarding forgiveness. I don't know how so many people today think that if they can get a victim to "forgive them" that God will automatically do so. Further, I don't know how so many people today think that because Jesus asked God to forgive his tormentors and killers that God automatically did so. That is why I included the second passage to show that immediately before the request for forgiveness by Jesus and his crucifixion, Jesus asked something else of God which was denied. An angel was sent to comfort him, so God of course heard Jesus' prayer, but God did not grant his request to remove the cup of suffering from Jesus. That would not be done until Jesus had died and resurrected, and will himself pass judgment on humans with great strictness at the Second Coming.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Case study: Fort Hood shooting
I'm going to call this a morality case study, even though the Fort Hood shooting is obviously mostly a criminal and a psychological matter. This is because I want to help my readers, especially the young people (Hi again!) to use powers of faith and reason to understand current events and also to discern the best path to accuracy and justice.
My first point is that human nature likes, yes I would say even craves, simplicity. They will naturally want one and only one reason and cause for why the Fort Hood shooting happened. You hear this on the talk shows where certain hosts gravitate immediately to the Muslim connection, while others gravitate to the stress of exposure (even second hand) to war and post traumatic stress. Yet you must understand that this event, like so many others, are the culmination of several factors all at once. This is why I want to do this as a case study for you.
We have not yet heard from the defendant, and I'm not going to put words in his mouth, second guess him, or try to predict what decisions he will make about culpability. I'm going to teach you how to look at the facts and put yourself in the optimal frame of mind for then processing new developments and information as they occur.
Fact one: The defendant is a psychiatrist, one who is focused on treating and also being among the most grievously war wounded. Thus his contact with the military arena is not firsthand, in that he was not in combat himself (yet). Any soldier will tell you that no one understands combat until he or she is actually in it. So one cannot accurately ascribe a combat mentality to the defendant based on experience, but only his second hand information and his imagination of what it will be like when he is deployed. Think about that last point. He is on the receiving end of those who have returned from combat mentally and physically wounded. He's not treating people who returned from Iraq and Afghanistan but are OK. So he is not part of those who greet the returning veterans and active military who are OK and going home. He is treating those who are severely injured and when not treating them, he is immersed in that environment nonetheless. Thus he gets a "sampling" of combat only from those who are the most injured by combat, and that sampling is the totality of his "experience." He then deduces and imagines what combat is like based on that environment of treating and being among the most wounded and injured of the combatants.
This fact, then, is not "the" cause, but "one" cause. Why is it not "the" cause? Because we can imagine that if other things were different that he might have had more perspective and more comfort in dealing with the one sided view he was receiving of combat. I'm not saying that combat is ever great, but here is my point.
Fact two: He was a lonely and isolated individual. The defendant was never married, had no children, and was not part of a tight knit cultural local community. There are two components to this. The first is reality of military life, which is you go where you are ordered. People from strong local ethnic cultures (Native Americans, for example) often have to leave their intimate support network and be very singular when going to college, joining the military, etc. So there is a cultural isolation that is inherent in that profession. The second and more urgent point is, however, that he was not married. Again and again I have warned that not marrying, the breakdown of the family, and "sexual liberation" will only lead to isolation and ruin. Don't believe me?
Genesis 2:18, 22, 24
Then the Lord God said, "It is not good that the man is alone; I will make him a helper like himself." And the rib which the Lord God took from the man, he made into a woman, and brought her to him. For this reason a man leaves his father and mother, and clings to his wife, and the two become one flesh.
Let's be all grown up here. People are meant to be together, to be married, to be intimate, to have a life partner and to have sex. Society is falling apart and individuals are going crazy because this freak show society has demonized traditional families and created generations of frustrated lone wolfs. Duh. So my point is that even though fact one regarding his combat imaginings and deductions are true, we don't know that he would have had difficulty with that or indeed snapped if he also had been in a traditional loving intimate and, yes, sexual marriage. This is what I mean when I say that these events are rarely "one cause." Do you see what I mean?
Fact three: He is a Muslim and relationships with Muslims can be, but are not required to be, more complex since the reality of September 11, 2001. Further, Muslim attitudes toward themselves and others can be, but are not required to be, more complex since the reality of September 11, 2001. It is a fact that the defendant joined the military and became a psychiatrist before September 11, 2001. The terrorism of September 11, 2001 is also a fact. Thus one must recognize, without excusing, the significance of timing. Suppose he were a younger man and was not ready to either go to college or enlist until 9/11/2001 had happened. Someone of a more timid character might well have decided, "Hey, I'm a Muslim and I'm not sure I can handle entering the military with all the limelight and pressure on any Muslim, so I'm going to go to school or whatever and not enlist." Those Muslim Americans who felt the patriotic call to the Armed Services went ahead and enlisted, during and post 9/11/2001. This guy, had he been younger, might have recognized that he was not cut out to be in the pressure cooker of belonging to the broad "category" of "Muslim" at the height of justifiable suspicion AND draw further attention to one's self by enlisting where one is going to get pressure, either intentional or unintentional. I'm not saying I believe he was harassed. I'm saying that when one is Muslim, or any other minority, one stands out and one must have a certain strength of character to function accordingly and appropriately. So my third point is the significance of timing of global events and the way people's character is tested by the luck of the draw regarding where they were and what decisions they made, and then subsequent events.
Fact four: Isolated and troubled people easily gravitate to increasingly extreme views, in both politics and their faith. When I say "troubled" I do not mean mentally or emotionally disturbed, in this case study. I mean that they are uneasy about something. As a psychiatrist the defendant would have heard disturbing events and feelings expressed by and experienced by his wounded warrior patients, and the others around him, even if he was not actually treating them. This creates an inherent tension that some can handle, while some cannot. Here's an exercise to help you to imagine the situation I am describing.
Suppose that you are a female counselor and all your patients have had violent encounters with females and here I don't mean battering. What if every one of your patients returned from combat where their injuries were inflicted by women soldiers on the other side? Suppose that you are a gay man who is a counselor. Suppose that every one of your patients had issues because they had been beaten up by gay men, and in return had sometimes done some very bad things?
Do you see what I mean? Some people, particularly those who are isolated (as described above) find themselves identifying more and more with a category of people rather than humanity as a whole when they have to deal with repeated examples of unsuccessful outcomes with their "category." In other words, the defendant would feel more and more "Muslim" and less and less "Army officer," less and less "counselor," less and less "American," less and less "humanitarian." The female counselor in my example above would likewise feel more and more "female" and less and less "officer" or "humanitarian" or "American." Also a well adjusted gay guy who is a regular ordinary counselor might start feeling more and more as being "gay" because patient after patient is describing combat or trauma with or at the hands of gays. Again, this is not an excuse at all. I am explaining why members of all groups find themselves more and more isolated and more and more radical if they are exposed to "bad outcomes" in relationships with their "category" of person.
This is different from the phenomenon that many discuss, and I allude to in fact one, where counselors who counsel certain cases of trauma over and over pick up, like second hand smoking, some of that trauma themselves. I don't think that we can conclude that about the defendant based on the facts, beyond what I said in fact one, which is that lacking first hand combat experience, his entire set of information and opinion is based on the trauma of his patients. So what I am saying is that I am skeptical that he is receiving second hand trauma in the classic way that let's say domestic violence counselors often start to pick up residue of trauma from repeated treatment of domestic violence victims. I am saying that based on the facts that 1) he was not in combat himself and 2) all of what he heard was based on wounded and traumatic experience we can deduce that he had a "sampling" of what combat in predominately Muslim countries was like, rather than first hand experience.
Thus when one is isolated (not married, no children, not in a strong local community network) and one receives troubling information about a category of person (in this case, his faith) that one belongs to, one often has the problem of becoming less, instead of more, integrated with humanity as a whole, and often more radicalized in one's perception of one's own category, with potential for feeling part of a one-sided situation with no neutral ground.
We know that some of the most troubling radicalization of Muslim children occurs when they are in dire poverty and the radical groups feed them, clothe them and send them to school, becoming their caregivers and family. This is what I mean that those who are isolated (without family) and/or troubled (in this example, suffering from poverty) are often quite naturally radicalized as they feel either 1) more isolated due to their "category" and 2) "rescued" by zealotry and "belonging."
I could continue with this but I want to wrap up this blogging here because my purpose is a case study, not an analysis with conclusions, since we simply do not know yet, and may never really know all the facts and perspectives. Again, this is by no means a defense of him but, rather, I am taking advantage of a situation to teach you, especially young people, how to understand the combinations of facts and opportunities/situations that mixed together result in a person's actions or an event.
Our society has become so overwhelmingly complex and false that people have "complexity fatigue" and yearn, unrealistically, for "one cause" and "one reason" factors and that simply is not the case for most events. It is usually a progression and a combination that results in such events and they must be understood as such if they are to be reduced or somehow "fixed."
Here is another fact, published in the New York Times. There are just over four hundred psychiatrists to treat a military of over 500,000 men and women. Whether the pressure of such shockingly few counselors for so many military (particularly during several hot wars) is part of the "cause" or not of the Fort Hood incident, I do not have to psychically channel the genius Albert Einstein to tell you that is far from being enough resources, period.
Further, I cannot believe the foolishness of an incredibly sexualized society that while promoting and pushing sex in all ways and forms except long term marriage allows the isolation of so many single frustrated males and females while they are under pressures of career, combat, and whatever. This is why arranged marriages took place in many societies so that people didn't "demand their rights" to "choose their own partner" and then instead drink, do drugs and end up going to bed alone or with "hook ups," all the while being saturated by the media about how "hot" and alluring one should be.
God ordained marriage as a coping mechanism. Life is a miserable drag (and I don't mean cross dressing, ha, no hate mail please) without the majority of people being married. Again, I don't need to channel Einstein to tell you that. People need stable and intimate spousal relationships and access to expression of their normal sexual needs.
Yes, I can hear some of you think, "Yeah, but what about those losers who nearly every day shoot their own wife and children and then commit suicide? If marriage is so great why do these people kill what they have?" This is what I mean by the complexity of real situations. There is rarely "one cause." Often there is a "trigger" or to use the old expression "The last straw" (referring to loading straw on a camel until the final straw added makes the whole load too heavy and breaks the camel's back). When we hear about events such as murder-suicides and the Fort Hood shooting, there is usually a final "trigger" event but that is rarely the "cause." The "cause" is usually an amalgamation of several fundamental facts.
Any good counselor can tell you that there is usually a combination of these factors: isolation, lack of consistent intimacy (love and sex), trauma (first hand or second hand), stress (workload and/or economic), violence (first or second hand, including media exposure) and addictions. What is the tipping point where one "snaps?" It is usually despair.
See, this is why it is so important to have a stable, normal, marriage and children based society. It is the ultimate and only bulwark against despair. Despair can be fleeting, just a moment of pure desperation, in which case if the person is able to be supported through that moment it passes. Or despair can be accumulating and grinding when the person is in a position of having "their back against a wall," such as we see with people who slowly slide into poverty due to years of economic collapse and ruin. An example of that is the many farmers in India who have been committing suicide in despair as they are ruined. So despair can be either "a moment" or "a long grinding path."
It is not enough to have economic governmental "safety nets." The problem is that the safety net against despair has been nearly totally ruined by this freak show modern society. The safety net of neighborhood, community, family, children and committed intimacy (sex is not a commodity to be obtained but part of the overall spousal intimacy) has been almost totally unraveled.
Again, I'm not excusing by any means or condoning any of the tragic and criminal events that we hear about these days. What I am trying to do is finally get your attention that this is a crisis beyond anyone's full comprehension. I come from a heavy World War II generation and I know what I'm talking about: the change from then to now regarding the "despair" safety net is almost indescribably vast.
I don't, however, want to further dilute the case study by going into my general rant about how these "do your own thing" generations have instead of being liberating have enslaved themselves to modern idolatry, isolation and despair. I concluded with those observations so that one can understand the fact finding that I have demonstrated in this case study about the tragic and criminal Fort Hood shooting against the panoply of so many of these "events" that seem to defy having a simple one source "cause" or "reason." Life and human needs and health are remarkably simple; it is the way that humans are tempted to self destruct and self delude that are astonishingly complex. I hope that this has helped some in regaining some reality based comprehension of what is going on.
My first point is that human nature likes, yes I would say even craves, simplicity. They will naturally want one and only one reason and cause for why the Fort Hood shooting happened. You hear this on the talk shows where certain hosts gravitate immediately to the Muslim connection, while others gravitate to the stress of exposure (even second hand) to war and post traumatic stress. Yet you must understand that this event, like so many others, are the culmination of several factors all at once. This is why I want to do this as a case study for you.
We have not yet heard from the defendant, and I'm not going to put words in his mouth, second guess him, or try to predict what decisions he will make about culpability. I'm going to teach you how to look at the facts and put yourself in the optimal frame of mind for then processing new developments and information as they occur.
Fact one: The defendant is a psychiatrist, one who is focused on treating and also being among the most grievously war wounded. Thus his contact with the military arena is not firsthand, in that he was not in combat himself (yet). Any soldier will tell you that no one understands combat until he or she is actually in it. So one cannot accurately ascribe a combat mentality to the defendant based on experience, but only his second hand information and his imagination of what it will be like when he is deployed. Think about that last point. He is on the receiving end of those who have returned from combat mentally and physically wounded. He's not treating people who returned from Iraq and Afghanistan but are OK. So he is not part of those who greet the returning veterans and active military who are OK and going home. He is treating those who are severely injured and when not treating them, he is immersed in that environment nonetheless. Thus he gets a "sampling" of combat only from those who are the most injured by combat, and that sampling is the totality of his "experience." He then deduces and imagines what combat is like based on that environment of treating and being among the most wounded and injured of the combatants.
This fact, then, is not "the" cause, but "one" cause. Why is it not "the" cause? Because we can imagine that if other things were different that he might have had more perspective and more comfort in dealing with the one sided view he was receiving of combat. I'm not saying that combat is ever great, but here is my point.
Fact two: He was a lonely and isolated individual. The defendant was never married, had no children, and was not part of a tight knit cultural local community. There are two components to this. The first is reality of military life, which is you go where you are ordered. People from strong local ethnic cultures (Native Americans, for example) often have to leave their intimate support network and be very singular when going to college, joining the military, etc. So there is a cultural isolation that is inherent in that profession. The second and more urgent point is, however, that he was not married. Again and again I have warned that not marrying, the breakdown of the family, and "sexual liberation" will only lead to isolation and ruin. Don't believe me?
Genesis 2:18, 22, 24
Then the Lord God said, "It is not good that the man is alone; I will make him a helper like himself." And the rib which the Lord God took from the man, he made into a woman, and brought her to him. For this reason a man leaves his father and mother, and clings to his wife, and the two become one flesh.
Let's be all grown up here. People are meant to be together, to be married, to be intimate, to have a life partner and to have sex. Society is falling apart and individuals are going crazy because this freak show society has demonized traditional families and created generations of frustrated lone wolfs. Duh. So my point is that even though fact one regarding his combat imaginings and deductions are true, we don't know that he would have had difficulty with that or indeed snapped if he also had been in a traditional loving intimate and, yes, sexual marriage. This is what I mean when I say that these events are rarely "one cause." Do you see what I mean?
Fact three: He is a Muslim and relationships with Muslims can be, but are not required to be, more complex since the reality of September 11, 2001. Further, Muslim attitudes toward themselves and others can be, but are not required to be, more complex since the reality of September 11, 2001. It is a fact that the defendant joined the military and became a psychiatrist before September 11, 2001. The terrorism of September 11, 2001 is also a fact. Thus one must recognize, without excusing, the significance of timing. Suppose he were a younger man and was not ready to either go to college or enlist until 9/11/2001 had happened. Someone of a more timid character might well have decided, "Hey, I'm a Muslim and I'm not sure I can handle entering the military with all the limelight and pressure on any Muslim, so I'm going to go to school or whatever and not enlist." Those Muslim Americans who felt the patriotic call to the Armed Services went ahead and enlisted, during and post 9/11/2001. This guy, had he been younger, might have recognized that he was not cut out to be in the pressure cooker of belonging to the broad "category" of "Muslim" at the height of justifiable suspicion AND draw further attention to one's self by enlisting where one is going to get pressure, either intentional or unintentional. I'm not saying I believe he was harassed. I'm saying that when one is Muslim, or any other minority, one stands out and one must have a certain strength of character to function accordingly and appropriately. So my third point is the significance of timing of global events and the way people's character is tested by the luck of the draw regarding where they were and what decisions they made, and then subsequent events.
Fact four: Isolated and troubled people easily gravitate to increasingly extreme views, in both politics and their faith. When I say "troubled" I do not mean mentally or emotionally disturbed, in this case study. I mean that they are uneasy about something. As a psychiatrist the defendant would have heard disturbing events and feelings expressed by and experienced by his wounded warrior patients, and the others around him, even if he was not actually treating them. This creates an inherent tension that some can handle, while some cannot. Here's an exercise to help you to imagine the situation I am describing.
Suppose that you are a female counselor and all your patients have had violent encounters with females and here I don't mean battering. What if every one of your patients returned from combat where their injuries were inflicted by women soldiers on the other side? Suppose that you are a gay man who is a counselor. Suppose that every one of your patients had issues because they had been beaten up by gay men, and in return had sometimes done some very bad things?
Do you see what I mean? Some people, particularly those who are isolated (as described above) find themselves identifying more and more with a category of people rather than humanity as a whole when they have to deal with repeated examples of unsuccessful outcomes with their "category." In other words, the defendant would feel more and more "Muslim" and less and less "Army officer," less and less "counselor," less and less "American," less and less "humanitarian." The female counselor in my example above would likewise feel more and more "female" and less and less "officer" or "humanitarian" or "American." Also a well adjusted gay guy who is a regular ordinary counselor might start feeling more and more as being "gay" because patient after patient is describing combat or trauma with or at the hands of gays. Again, this is not an excuse at all. I am explaining why members of all groups find themselves more and more isolated and more and more radical if they are exposed to "bad outcomes" in relationships with their "category" of person.
This is different from the phenomenon that many discuss, and I allude to in fact one, where counselors who counsel certain cases of trauma over and over pick up, like second hand smoking, some of that trauma themselves. I don't think that we can conclude that about the defendant based on the facts, beyond what I said in fact one, which is that lacking first hand combat experience, his entire set of information and opinion is based on the trauma of his patients. So what I am saying is that I am skeptical that he is receiving second hand trauma in the classic way that let's say domestic violence counselors often start to pick up residue of trauma from repeated treatment of domestic violence victims. I am saying that based on the facts that 1) he was not in combat himself and 2) all of what he heard was based on wounded and traumatic experience we can deduce that he had a "sampling" of what combat in predominately Muslim countries was like, rather than first hand experience.
Thus when one is isolated (not married, no children, not in a strong local community network) and one receives troubling information about a category of person (in this case, his faith) that one belongs to, one often has the problem of becoming less, instead of more, integrated with humanity as a whole, and often more radicalized in one's perception of one's own category, with potential for feeling part of a one-sided situation with no neutral ground.
We know that some of the most troubling radicalization of Muslim children occurs when they are in dire poverty and the radical groups feed them, clothe them and send them to school, becoming their caregivers and family. This is what I mean that those who are isolated (without family) and/or troubled (in this example, suffering from poverty) are often quite naturally radicalized as they feel either 1) more isolated due to their "category" and 2) "rescued" by zealotry and "belonging."
I could continue with this but I want to wrap up this blogging here because my purpose is a case study, not an analysis with conclusions, since we simply do not know yet, and may never really know all the facts and perspectives. Again, this is by no means a defense of him but, rather, I am taking advantage of a situation to teach you, especially young people, how to understand the combinations of facts and opportunities/situations that mixed together result in a person's actions or an event.
Our society has become so overwhelmingly complex and false that people have "complexity fatigue" and yearn, unrealistically, for "one cause" and "one reason" factors and that simply is not the case for most events. It is usually a progression and a combination that results in such events and they must be understood as such if they are to be reduced or somehow "fixed."
Here is another fact, published in the New York Times. There are just over four hundred psychiatrists to treat a military of over 500,000 men and women. Whether the pressure of such shockingly few counselors for so many military (particularly during several hot wars) is part of the "cause" or not of the Fort Hood incident, I do not have to psychically channel the genius Albert Einstein to tell you that is far from being enough resources, period.
Further, I cannot believe the foolishness of an incredibly sexualized society that while promoting and pushing sex in all ways and forms except long term marriage allows the isolation of so many single frustrated males and females while they are under pressures of career, combat, and whatever. This is why arranged marriages took place in many societies so that people didn't "demand their rights" to "choose their own partner" and then instead drink, do drugs and end up going to bed alone or with "hook ups," all the while being saturated by the media about how "hot" and alluring one should be.
God ordained marriage as a coping mechanism. Life is a miserable drag (and I don't mean cross dressing, ha, no hate mail please) without the majority of people being married. Again, I don't need to channel Einstein to tell you that. People need stable and intimate spousal relationships and access to expression of their normal sexual needs.
Yes, I can hear some of you think, "Yeah, but what about those losers who nearly every day shoot their own wife and children and then commit suicide? If marriage is so great why do these people kill what they have?" This is what I mean by the complexity of real situations. There is rarely "one cause." Often there is a "trigger" or to use the old expression "The last straw" (referring to loading straw on a camel until the final straw added makes the whole load too heavy and breaks the camel's back). When we hear about events such as murder-suicides and the Fort Hood shooting, there is usually a final "trigger" event but that is rarely the "cause." The "cause" is usually an amalgamation of several fundamental facts.
Any good counselor can tell you that there is usually a combination of these factors: isolation, lack of consistent intimacy (love and sex), trauma (first hand or second hand), stress (workload and/or economic), violence (first or second hand, including media exposure) and addictions. What is the tipping point where one "snaps?" It is usually despair.
See, this is why it is so important to have a stable, normal, marriage and children based society. It is the ultimate and only bulwark against despair. Despair can be fleeting, just a moment of pure desperation, in which case if the person is able to be supported through that moment it passes. Or despair can be accumulating and grinding when the person is in a position of having "their back against a wall," such as we see with people who slowly slide into poverty due to years of economic collapse and ruin. An example of that is the many farmers in India who have been committing suicide in despair as they are ruined. So despair can be either "a moment" or "a long grinding path."
It is not enough to have economic governmental "safety nets." The problem is that the safety net against despair has been nearly totally ruined by this freak show modern society. The safety net of neighborhood, community, family, children and committed intimacy (sex is not a commodity to be obtained but part of the overall spousal intimacy) has been almost totally unraveled.
Again, I'm not excusing by any means or condoning any of the tragic and criminal events that we hear about these days. What I am trying to do is finally get your attention that this is a crisis beyond anyone's full comprehension. I come from a heavy World War II generation and I know what I'm talking about: the change from then to now regarding the "despair" safety net is almost indescribably vast.
I don't, however, want to further dilute the case study by going into my general rant about how these "do your own thing" generations have instead of being liberating have enslaved themselves to modern idolatry, isolation and despair. I concluded with those observations so that one can understand the fact finding that I have demonstrated in this case study about the tragic and criminal Fort Hood shooting against the panoply of so many of these "events" that seem to defy having a simple one source "cause" or "reason." Life and human needs and health are remarkably simple; it is the way that humans are tempted to self destruct and self delude that are astonishingly complex. I hope that this has helped some in regaining some reality based comprehension of what is going on.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Who is "trash" and who is "lost?"
The answer is that no one is trash, while many people, if not most people, are lost.
In the Biblical times, and in the time of the giving of the Qur'an, understand that God's word was being preached and given by God to the prophets to people who were, like most people of the world then, very poor. Many starved if there was just one missed harvest in a year. People lived "hand to mouth," as the old saying goes (in other words, what they gathered for food went straight into keeping them alive day to day). So people had no concept of "garbage." Nothing went to waste and there was no such thing as "trash" in the first place. Thus God would never use such a term to describe even the worst of the worst of people since the people he was speaking to would not understand the concept of "trash" or "garbage" at all. Remember people even went "to the bathroom" in agricultural fields and pastures so that it could compost and enrich the soil (not a problem when there were many fewer people than today; today we need sanitation systems both for cleanliness and the environment).
So my first point is that God speaks to people using terminology that is 1) perfectly accurate, as God is perfection and thus is truth personified and 2) is understandable and relevant to the people who lived at the time AND remains truthful and understandable through the ages.
Thus when God chides people, notice that he never refers to them as trash or garbage while they are alive. From this you need to understand that thinking of any person as "trash" or "garbage" is against God's example and teachings. No one, no matter what they say or do, is trash or garbage. What are they, then? They are "lost."
Someone who is lost is someone who does not know where they are. "Lost" does not mean, in scripture, losing a game. Remember, the Bible is not full of modern double speak, double entendres or "coded" messages, or modern slang. Lost means lost. Someone who is lost is someone who does not know where they are.
Matthew 10:5-7
These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand."
Here Jesus is ordering the disciples to seek out those who are lost...not trying to convert others from their beliefs, but to find those who are lost. And the lost at the time of Jesus were the Jews. No one is "trash" or "garbage," they are lost.
Matthew 18:10-14
Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones: for I say unto you, That is heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. For the Son of man is come to save that which is lost. How think ye? If a man have a hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the moutains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.
Many recognize this as one of Jesus' most crucial passages for all the obvious reasons, but they miss the point that was being made obvious in the cultural context of the times, and which has now come full circle again in modern times. The closest Jews had to "trashy" people were the children. The disciples tried to shoo the children away from Jesus (and not in a cute way) because children were thought to be somewhat valueless when it comes to any matter of importance, such as salvation. So this is the closest that one can find in the Gospels where there is a superior attitude by class (adults over children) and Jesus immediately stomps on that with no uncertainty. He will not allow the disciples to even for a moment view children as kind of bits of trash hanging about. Jesus tells them that the opposite is true: that the children's guardian angels constantly face God himself in heaven.
Then Jesus slides directly into discussing, again, how they are to seek the lost. Children are lost because they have not yet received the word of God. This is why Jesus slides immediately from chastising the disciples for downgrading the dignity of goodness and being of children to telling them how both children and adults must be viewed, as lost sheep. Notice Jesus does not say, "Well, unless of course the lost sheep is kind of a trashy one and then it's OK for it to be lost because it does no good anyway."
Before discussing scriptural admonitions to view people as "lost" and not "trash" or "garbage" any further, let me point out where the "trash" does indeed get "taken out" for disposal. That is at the end of life when each person is judged, and at the End of Times. What is "trash" is the sum total of a sinful life after it has been completed in the living. Until a person dies and is judged they are not viewed as "trash."
What was Biblical trash? The dry husks, the hull, of wheat, which is called chaff.
Psalm 1:4
The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
Jer 23:26-32
How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? Yea, they are prophets in the deceit of their own heart; Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbor, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is chaff to the wheat? saith the Lord. Is not my word like a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces? Therefore behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that steal my words every one from his neighbor. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say, He saith. Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the Lord, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the Lord.
Both of these passages underscore that genuine "trash" is symbolized as ungodliness and false prophecy. It is the sinful actions, not the human integrity, that is being condemned by God as chaff, which is wispy trash that is either blown away into the wind, or burned in the fire. God is saying, in his very own words, that the words of the prophets who spread lies via their own dreams and other gossipy falsehoods are "light" as in "lightweight" and thus like chaff will be easily dispersed and come to nothing at all in the end, while God's words are heavy, so heavy as to be like a hammer that breaks a rock into pieces. So this gives you understanding of the only context in scripture where something is viewed as "trashy," which are deeds, not the essence of the person. Thus this all leads to the role of Jesus Christ.
Matthew 3:11-12
[Spoken by John the Baptist].
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
John the Baptist prophesies that the Christ, Jesus, will use the fire of the Holy Spirit to purge and retain the good, those who will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, and also use the fire to cast into the flames of hell those who do not repent, and that, again, is the image of the chaff being burned as symbolizing people who have misspent their entire individual life and thus are to the eternal fire condemned.
Thus one is to understand two things: 1) only God, and through Jesus Christ to whom this authority is given, will people be judged as "trash" as in chaff and 2) while their deeds in life may be sinful chaff, such as false prophecy, they are not to be given up on until the very end, when they have perished and receive judgment.
Luke 15:7-11
I say unto you, That likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninety nine just persons which need no repentance. Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep over the house, and seek diligently till she find it? And when she hath found it, she calleth her friends and her neighbors together, saying Rejoice with me; for I have found the piece which I had lost. Likewise, I say unto you, There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.
True godliness and being just, whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian, means that one never gives up on the lost sheep or the lost coin, knowing that God's mercy exists throughout a person's life. Thus one should never think of a human being as being "garbage" or "trash." However, one must also recognize that certain deeds are like the chaff, either of no significance to be blown away, or leading one to the fire, and that one must focus on the constant opportunity to repent and stop making one's self eligible to be treated as chaff by God at judgment.
I have to underscore something I alluded to earlier, about one's attitude toward children. Children were viewed as a bit like trash by the disciples only because they did not have the seriousness attached to them yet that comes with age and hence respect. But what do people today view children as? Look at the proliferation of child pornography and, hand in glove along with it, the crass way that young children are sexualized by adults, including their parents. Children were looked down upon by the disciples only because they were viewed as not being appropriately aged to partake in serious matters such as faith (listening to Jesus, for example), even though they were all being raised as devout Jews. Can you see how much more the horror of these times where children are actually treated and expected to treat each other as sexualized trash? Do you think anyone who promotes children as sexualized trash is going to escape the fire? Only if they genuinely repent, which is why the "lost" are the object of God's care and concern.
Notice that Jesus asked God to forgive those who crucified him because they did not know what they are doing (a sign of being lost). He did not point out which people are "garbage" or "trash" after all!
Revelation 14:16
And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.
Wheat was harvested by a long sickle, and so this image of the wheat again enters at the end of times, when the whole earth is reaped for separating into chaff and grain. Again, what one must understand in the context of the entire bible is not that one is "safe" until the end of times, duh, but that discerning a person as "trash" aka chaff only takes place at the end of their life. People must and should refrain from categorizing anyone as being "garbage" or "trash" as 1) God himself does not do that 2) his genuine prophets do not do that 3) only certain ungodly deeds and pagan practices are actually viewed as chaff, not the people who do them and 4) God only deems people to be chaff and to be burned when they die, either at the end of their life or when all lose their lives at the end of times.
I hope that you have found this helpful.
In the Biblical times, and in the time of the giving of the Qur'an, understand that God's word was being preached and given by God to the prophets to people who were, like most people of the world then, very poor. Many starved if there was just one missed harvest in a year. People lived "hand to mouth," as the old saying goes (in other words, what they gathered for food went straight into keeping them alive day to day). So people had no concept of "garbage." Nothing went to waste and there was no such thing as "trash" in the first place. Thus God would never use such a term to describe even the worst of the worst of people since the people he was speaking to would not understand the concept of "trash" or "garbage" at all. Remember people even went "to the bathroom" in agricultural fields and pastures so that it could compost and enrich the soil (not a problem when there were many fewer people than today; today we need sanitation systems both for cleanliness and the environment).
So my first point is that God speaks to people using terminology that is 1) perfectly accurate, as God is perfection and thus is truth personified and 2) is understandable and relevant to the people who lived at the time AND remains truthful and understandable through the ages.
Thus when God chides people, notice that he never refers to them as trash or garbage while they are alive. From this you need to understand that thinking of any person as "trash" or "garbage" is against God's example and teachings. No one, no matter what they say or do, is trash or garbage. What are they, then? They are "lost."
Someone who is lost is someone who does not know where they are. "Lost" does not mean, in scripture, losing a game. Remember, the Bible is not full of modern double speak, double entendres or "coded" messages, or modern slang. Lost means lost. Someone who is lost is someone who does not know where they are.
Matthew 10:5-7
These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand."
Here Jesus is ordering the disciples to seek out those who are lost...not trying to convert others from their beliefs, but to find those who are lost. And the lost at the time of Jesus were the Jews. No one is "trash" or "garbage," they are lost.
Matthew 18:10-14
Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones: for I say unto you, That is heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. For the Son of man is come to save that which is lost. How think ye? If a man have a hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the moutains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.
Many recognize this as one of Jesus' most crucial passages for all the obvious reasons, but they miss the point that was being made obvious in the cultural context of the times, and which has now come full circle again in modern times. The closest Jews had to "trashy" people were the children. The disciples tried to shoo the children away from Jesus (and not in a cute way) because children were thought to be somewhat valueless when it comes to any matter of importance, such as salvation. So this is the closest that one can find in the Gospels where there is a superior attitude by class (adults over children) and Jesus immediately stomps on that with no uncertainty. He will not allow the disciples to even for a moment view children as kind of bits of trash hanging about. Jesus tells them that the opposite is true: that the children's guardian angels constantly face God himself in heaven.
Then Jesus slides directly into discussing, again, how they are to seek the lost. Children are lost because they have not yet received the word of God. This is why Jesus slides immediately from chastising the disciples for downgrading the dignity of goodness and being of children to telling them how both children and adults must be viewed, as lost sheep. Notice Jesus does not say, "Well, unless of course the lost sheep is kind of a trashy one and then it's OK for it to be lost because it does no good anyway."
Before discussing scriptural admonitions to view people as "lost" and not "trash" or "garbage" any further, let me point out where the "trash" does indeed get "taken out" for disposal. That is at the end of life when each person is judged, and at the End of Times. What is "trash" is the sum total of a sinful life after it has been completed in the living. Until a person dies and is judged they are not viewed as "trash."
What was Biblical trash? The dry husks, the hull, of wheat, which is called chaff.
Psalm 1:4
The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
Jer 23:26-32
How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? Yea, they are prophets in the deceit of their own heart; Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbor, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal. The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is chaff to the wheat? saith the Lord. Is not my word like a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces? Therefore behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that steal my words every one from his neighbor. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say, He saith. Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the Lord, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them; therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the Lord.
Both of these passages underscore that genuine "trash" is symbolized as ungodliness and false prophecy. It is the sinful actions, not the human integrity, that is being condemned by God as chaff, which is wispy trash that is either blown away into the wind, or burned in the fire. God is saying, in his very own words, that the words of the prophets who spread lies via their own dreams and other gossipy falsehoods are "light" as in "lightweight" and thus like chaff will be easily dispersed and come to nothing at all in the end, while God's words are heavy, so heavy as to be like a hammer that breaks a rock into pieces. So this gives you understanding of the only context in scripture where something is viewed as "trashy," which are deeds, not the essence of the person. Thus this all leads to the role of Jesus Christ.
Matthew 3:11-12
[Spoken by John the Baptist].
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
John the Baptist prophesies that the Christ, Jesus, will use the fire of the Holy Spirit to purge and retain the good, those who will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, and also use the fire to cast into the flames of hell those who do not repent, and that, again, is the image of the chaff being burned as symbolizing people who have misspent their entire individual life and thus are to the eternal fire condemned.
Thus one is to understand two things: 1) only God, and through Jesus Christ to whom this authority is given, will people be judged as "trash" as in chaff and 2) while their deeds in life may be sinful chaff, such as false prophecy, they are not to be given up on until the very end, when they have perished and receive judgment.
Luke 15:7-11
I say unto you, That likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninety nine just persons which need no repentance. Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep over the house, and seek diligently till she find it? And when she hath found it, she calleth her friends and her neighbors together, saying Rejoice with me; for I have found the piece which I had lost. Likewise, I say unto you, There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.
True godliness and being just, whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian, means that one never gives up on the lost sheep or the lost coin, knowing that God's mercy exists throughout a person's life. Thus one should never think of a human being as being "garbage" or "trash." However, one must also recognize that certain deeds are like the chaff, either of no significance to be blown away, or leading one to the fire, and that one must focus on the constant opportunity to repent and stop making one's self eligible to be treated as chaff by God at judgment.
I have to underscore something I alluded to earlier, about one's attitude toward children. Children were viewed as a bit like trash by the disciples only because they did not have the seriousness attached to them yet that comes with age and hence respect. But what do people today view children as? Look at the proliferation of child pornography and, hand in glove along with it, the crass way that young children are sexualized by adults, including their parents. Children were looked down upon by the disciples only because they were viewed as not being appropriately aged to partake in serious matters such as faith (listening to Jesus, for example), even though they were all being raised as devout Jews. Can you see how much more the horror of these times where children are actually treated and expected to treat each other as sexualized trash? Do you think anyone who promotes children as sexualized trash is going to escape the fire? Only if they genuinely repent, which is why the "lost" are the object of God's care and concern.
Notice that Jesus asked God to forgive those who crucified him because they did not know what they are doing (a sign of being lost). He did not point out which people are "garbage" or "trash" after all!
Revelation 14:16
And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.
Wheat was harvested by a long sickle, and so this image of the wheat again enters at the end of times, when the whole earth is reaped for separating into chaff and grain. Again, what one must understand in the context of the entire bible is not that one is "safe" until the end of times, duh, but that discerning a person as "trash" aka chaff only takes place at the end of their life. People must and should refrain from categorizing anyone as being "garbage" or "trash" as 1) God himself does not do that 2) his genuine prophets do not do that 3) only certain ungodly deeds and pagan practices are actually viewed as chaff, not the people who do them and 4) God only deems people to be chaff and to be burned when they die, either at the end of their life or when all lose their lives at the end of times.
I hope that you have found this helpful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
