For some reason, my sister mentioned over dinner last night that the word "humble" is linked to the word "humus", which means "ground" or "dirt". In case you're wondering, no, our dinner conversations are rarely if ever this intellectual/pretentious, nor were we eating chick peas. The point of highlighting this link was not for my sister to show us how clever she is, but to remind us that in a sense to be humble to remember where you came from - the ground...or in J-Lo's case, the block, but that's got nothing to do with humus.
I've been having a strange recurring thought recently, one that's left me equal parts grateful and confused. The thought is this - 25 years ago I didn't exist. I was nothing. That is, I was no thing. Nobody on this earth knew me, because there was no me. I had no physical body, I had no thoughts, I had no life. It's easy for me to think that the world started when I was born, but how conceited a world view is that? The truth is, I came from the ground, and was given life. I didn't earn life, or create myself. None of us can make such claims. What human being who has ever lived can claim to have created himself? Human life is not a self-existent phenomenon. It exists because a Being almost incomprehensible to us breathed life into mortal clay. A Being who is self-existent and is the source of all life decided to create human beings for His glory. And we have each of us been trying to steal that glory ever since.
It's no coincidence that where there are people in the Bible who know God, these same people are extremely self-aware, and can be said to know their earthy origins. David could sing to God, "What is man that you are mindful of him...?" (Psa. 8:4). And when Isaiah had a vision of God on His throne, his first words were "Woe is me! For I am undone; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, Jehovah of Hosts." (Isa. 6:5)
It's quite easy to be proud and to think that the world revolves around us when we forget our origins. When we think of ourselves as eternal beings who are self-created, what 'need' do we have for God? Why should He receive the glory for my existence? And even if we do tip our hats in God's direction, it's quite easy for us to live our daily lives in a very human centred way, where all that matters is if we are as good as those around us, or perhaps a little better. If so, great, and if not, then at least we're not as bad as so and so. As Dr Arden Autry likes to say, the average person thinks he's better than the average person.
Unfortunately for us, the average person is not the yardstick we are to measure ourselves by. If we are to ever be truly humble as creatures, it is our Creator -- the One in whose image we were originally crafted -- who determines the standard. And as Isaiah discovered, our only response can be "Woe is me" when such a comparison between creature and Creator is made. In his excellent book The Holiness of God, R.C. Sproul puts it this way:
"As long as Isaiah could compare himself to other mortals, he was able to sustain a lofty opinion of his own character. The instant he measured himself by the ultimate standard, he was destroyed – morally and spiritually annihilated. He was undone. He came apart. His sense of integrity collapsed."
Of course God's plan is not to simply rip us to shreds and watch us wander around miserably in a state of self loathing. The end result of humility before God is not destruction, but grace. We are told that "God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble" (1 Pet. 5:5). As Sproul goes on to say,
"Far from God seeking to destroy the “self”, as many distortions of Christianity would claim, God redeems the self. He heals the self so that it may be useful and fulfilled in the mission to which the person is called."
How much we know God will show itself in how aware we are of our need for God every second of every day. The Christian life starts with an acknowledgment of our need for God's salvation, but contrary to what we as self-help orientated humans might be inclined to think, our need for God does not end there. We don't grow into independence, but rather we grow to become more and more dependent on God as we relinquish our will in exchange for His. A Christian of 60 years needs God just as much as a Christian of 1 day. And a Christian of 60 years should be just as humble if not moreso than a person who has just realised that Christ is the only way to be saved from sin, for this Christian of 60 years has spent their life in the presence of the Holy, where they have been daily "undone".
I've been having a strange recurring thought recently, one that's left me equal parts grateful and confused. The thought is this - 25 years ago I didn't exist. I was nothing. That is, I was no thing. Nobody on this earth knew me, because there was no me. I had no physical body, I had no thoughts, I had no life. It's easy for me to think that the world started when I was born, but how conceited a world view is that? The truth is, I came from the ground, and was given life. I didn't earn life, or create myself. None of us can make such claims. What human being who has ever lived can claim to have created himself? Human life is not a self-existent phenomenon. It exists because a Being almost incomprehensible to us breathed life into mortal clay. A Being who is self-existent and is the source of all life decided to create human beings for His glory. And we have each of us been trying to steal that glory ever since.
It's no coincidence that where there are people in the Bible who know God, these same people are extremely self-aware, and can be said to know their earthy origins. David could sing to God, "What is man that you are mindful of him...?" (Psa. 8:4). And when Isaiah had a vision of God on His throne, his first words were "Woe is me! For I am undone; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, Jehovah of Hosts." (Isa. 6:5)
It's quite easy to be proud and to think that the world revolves around us when we forget our origins. When we think of ourselves as eternal beings who are self-created, what 'need' do we have for God? Why should He receive the glory for my existence? And even if we do tip our hats in God's direction, it's quite easy for us to live our daily lives in a very human centred way, where all that matters is if we are as good as those around us, or perhaps a little better. If so, great, and if not, then at least we're not as bad as so and so. As Dr Arden Autry likes to say, the average person thinks he's better than the average person.
Unfortunately for us, the average person is not the yardstick we are to measure ourselves by. If we are to ever be truly humble as creatures, it is our Creator -- the One in whose image we were originally crafted -- who determines the standard. And as Isaiah discovered, our only response can be "Woe is me" when such a comparison between creature and Creator is made. In his excellent book The Holiness of God, R.C. Sproul puts it this way:
"As long as Isaiah could compare himself to other mortals, he was able to sustain a lofty opinion of his own character. The instant he measured himself by the ultimate standard, he was destroyed – morally and spiritually annihilated. He was undone. He came apart. His sense of integrity collapsed."
Of course God's plan is not to simply rip us to shreds and watch us wander around miserably in a state of self loathing. The end result of humility before God is not destruction, but grace. We are told that "God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble" (1 Pet. 5:5). As Sproul goes on to say,
"Far from God seeking to destroy the “self”, as many distortions of Christianity would claim, God redeems the self. He heals the self so that it may be useful and fulfilled in the mission to which the person is called."
How much we know God will show itself in how aware we are of our need for God every second of every day. The Christian life starts with an acknowledgment of our need for God's salvation, but contrary to what we as self-help orientated humans might be inclined to think, our need for God does not end there. We don't grow into independence, but rather we grow to become more and more dependent on God as we relinquish our will in exchange for His. A Christian of 60 years needs God just as much as a Christian of 1 day. And a Christian of 60 years should be just as humble if not moreso than a person who has just realised that Christ is the only way to be saved from sin, for this Christian of 60 years has spent their life in the presence of the Holy, where they have been daily "undone".
Because you asked for my opinion: The last year of my life has been a test in humility, an endeavour in casting off the shackles of vanity and to see that ''in some way every man is my superior'' but perhaps your yard stick needs adjusting. Now I don't have my bible with me so I won't be quoting passages but to my recollection the God of the OT is by any standards an insecure, narcissist and hardly one to be setting standards on humility. And if you're looking for a being (i'll leave that b uncapitalised if you don't mind) to venerate and lavish praise upon for your creation then look no further than your kitchen table. If you're seeking a miracle, look no futher than the anatomical miracle of child birth for is it not enough to gaze at a garden in wonder without having to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it? So God if you're reading I'm not a homophope, not vengeful, not sexist and I'm working real hard on the megalomania... that is how I'm your superior!
ReplyDeleteI did ask for your opinion, but can I take that back? Nah Im just kidding. God as insecure is I think misinterpreting passages where God wants people to love Him and obey Him. Is a father who desires that his children love and obey him insecure? I don't think so. I would say that he is a good father. Of course we're singing off of different hymn sheets - me from the God created everything sheet, and you from the nothing created everything (or atoms created everything). Also, when God gave the command to love Him, it wasn't in a vacuum. He gave it to a people whom He had just delivered from 400 years of slavery. You can debate the veracity of the Bible's history, but it never paints the picture of a cold, insecure, narcissistic God.
ReplyDeleteAnd as for humility, Jesus said that if you have seen Him you have seen the God of the OT. This is the same Jesus who set the ultimate standard of humility by going to the cross voluntarily on account of us. You can write all of this off as a fabrication, a myth, but there is far more evidence to suggest it is true. The same applies to the resurrection.
If you want to see what God is like, look at the cross.
No a father who wants a child to love him is not insecure. A father who threatens his child with eternal damnation in the absence of such love is another matter though. And I'm sure out interpretations of the Bible will differ significantly, evident in the fact that I recall the God of the OT to be quite different than what you're portraying. For instance didn't God make Abraham sacrifice one of his sons in order to feed his little ego?
ReplyDeleteAnd as for evidence I would suggest that is a word any religious believer should shy away from. I took heed of your advide and decided to gaze upon my own personal cross to see what it revealed of God. Unfortunately my cross, like God, doesn't really exist!
To be honest it sounds like you're talking about the god dawkins describes as opposed to the actual God portrayed in the entire Bible. I cant possibly take the time to give you a fuller picture, but since you mentioned the Abraham story Ill go with that. God did tell Abraham to go to a mountain and sacrifice the son which God miraculously gave him, but God's intention was never to kill Isaac. In fact Abraham was so sure of this that he knew that even if Isaac died God would raise him from the dead. This was the promised son through whom "all the nations of the world will be blessed".
ReplyDeleteAnyway to cut a long story short God didn't allow Abraham to kill Isaac, and instead provided a ram (or possibly a goat) to be sacrificed. This event was actually a foreshadowing of God's sacrifice of His own son, Jesus. A sacrifice He made on our behalf.
You can choose not to believe that of course, but this is an event in history which is given a very significant meaning in the Bible. In fact its the event on which everything hinges. You seem to be passing it off as irrelevant or as a fabrication, but by doing so you are taking the easy way out.
And as for evidence, its important to remember that Christianity is not a purely fideistic religion. It's a religion based on history. There were witnesses to Jesus death, and witnesses to His resurrection. There was an empty tomb with no body accounted for. Did the apostles just make this stuff up for the fun of it, and then die for something they knew to be a fraud? Why would they die on account of someone they new to be a false Messiah? If Christ didn't die and rise again, why are there Christians? The faith of the earliest apostles was never conjured up in someones imagination or a subjective thing like that of Islam. It was firmly based on facts. Jesus demonstrated that He was who He said He was, and they believed.
With regards eternal damnation and all of that, you have to understand the holiness of God. We live in a universe with an objective moral law, set by God and standing as a reflection of His character. In a moral universe crime must be punished. Rebellion must meet retribution. God's perfect holiness demands it. It must, otherwise He is no God at all, and certainly not a just God.
The marvel therefore is not that God punishes those who rebel. The marvel is that we as rebels can be forgiven by a holy God. how? Because He Himself made a way, and once again I point you to the Cross of Christ.
In essence, the cross is what Christianity has to offer people. That's its unique message.
To be honest I care little for your interpretations of the Bible, there are as meaningless as my own aspersions because to be honest its all bullshit in my opinion. There is a gentleman called Karl Popper who I once studied. He outlined the difference between science and psuedo sciences such as religion. The difference lies in falsification, the theroy of relativity can be falisfied but there is no point I can make which can overcome blind faith and in that sense religion can never be falsified in the same way that marxism can't be falisified for no matter what way you discredit their beliefs the followers can just interpret it another way but does that make it right? I would suggest not. Its sad to me that a man needs to believe in some mystical over-lord to justify his own existence, just think of how different the world would be if men were restrained to such beliefs. The fact that you seem to think that people can't be good without a higher power dictating how they act disappoints me so, what did we do Declan that was so bad that you needed to seek such drastic measure to make us worthwhile? This is an exercise in futility, I realise that now, for it seems to me that your opinions are akin to a child who has decided that every equations answer is 7 (the selection of the number 7 is as arbitrary as your choice of god) and thus will look for no real answers. I can not convey how much it disappoints me that one of the most intelligent friends has devoted his life to something so unproductive.
ReplyDeleteAnd as for proof, well Declan your ''evidence'' almost doesn't deserve debunking such is the frivilous nature of your said evidence. By your logic you would have to believe in UFOs (which i happen to believe is a far more substantial belief than that of religion) for there were witnesses to Roswell Declan. In fact I would suggest far more individuals have claimed to witness UFOs than have claimed to have seen the son of god. Your view point also is based on the fact that the bible would have to be 100% accurate, in essence your belief is all that sustains your belief. I know this probably won't alter your thinking , I can only hope is forces you to ask questions which you've been trained not to ask.
Who said anything about blind faith? The Church didn't start because of blind faith. It started because more than 500 people saw the risen Christ. Is that a higher number than UFO spotters? I dont know, but I find it quite dismissive of you to just throw away eye-witness testimony (testimony from people who value high moral behaviour) and circumstantial evidence because in your opinion its "bullshit". I'm afraid I cant be so dismissive. Why did they die on account of something they KNEW to be false? Why would they just make it all up? It certainly wasnt for the money or for the prestige.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Bible, you dont just get to bring it in to your arguments when its convenient, and then write it off when it's convenient. And as for me being akin to a child of 7, I havent just given you illogical, stupid answers. You know I haven't. God makes sense (to some degree). I said it before in a post a while back and Ill say it again. People's problem with God is never fundamentally intellectual - it's moral. People don't leave the Church or ignore the Church because they think Atheism is the more intelligent belief. They leave because they want to behave (what they know to be) immorally without that sense that they are accountable to a holy God.
Dont make the mistake of thinking that being an Atheist is purely an intellectual exercise. You have as much vested interest in being an Atheist as I do being a Theist.
Also, nobody has "trained" me not to ask questions. Do you not think that I think about your questions more than most? You obviously do, since you liken my behaviour to a 7 year old who thinks 7 is the answer to every maths problem. Well I hate to disappoint you again, but I've thought long and hard about the issues people have with Christianity; the issues I have with Christianity. I've questioned a lot of things, and at the end of the day the reason I have turned my back on God in the past (and to this day) is ALWAYS moral.
Im aware that our starting points in these arguments (or perhaps debates) are as far apart as possible. I believe in God, you don't. Therefore anything I say beyond that comes off as blind faith, and is ultimately meaningless to you. I'm just sorry that you think Im throwing my life away; that I'm some thoughtless hack who hasn't got a clue and is just going along with his upbringing because it makes him feel tingly inside. I don't think that's the case, but that's just me.