The Organic Nature of Reality

The reality and objectivity of Jesus' incarnation, death and resurrection doesn't seem to garner enough attention with the Protestant/Evangelical/Roman/Orthodox world.  For sure, these branches talk about Jesus and his work, but the objectivity does not seem to be embraced as it should. 
When we read in the gospels and the epistles that Jesus died to save the world or that God loves all men and sent his son to die for the sins of the world, we need to understand what is being said here.  The question should come to mind, "Did Jesus succeed in what he set out to do?"  Of course we will say yes, but how that "yes" is defined differs between branches.  The Calvinists will argue that Jesus' saving work only applies to "the elect", while the Evangelical/Roman world will argue that Jesus' work was comprehensive, the actual application only pertains to those who choose to embrace it.  But the Orthodox world sees it differently.
Far too often, the dichotomy of "universalism" or "unconditional election" is given as the only two options, but this is false.  If we take the words of the gospels literally, we would have to say, "Yes, Jesus died for all men", but that does not mean that all men will be saved.
To cut to the main point here, Jesus' work was not about a legal transaction or a fee paid to an angry God.  God is love, not a bank ledger or an angry judge. Man's problem was not about paying a fee, but about being in bondage to sin and death.  Jesus' death and resurrection was about defeating the power of sin and death and freeing man from that bondage.  Now that ALL men are free from that bondage, it is now each man's responsibility to make use of the tools that God has given us through the church by the power of the Holy Spirit, to transform his soul into the image of Christ. The Orthodox church calls this theosis.
So really what it comes to is two things.  First, Jesus actually accomplished all that he set out to do, he defeated the power of sin and death for all men. Second, man too has responsibility to transform his soul by the power of the Holy Spirit.  This two fold responsibility has always been the situation/relationship between God and man.
This is not a matter of man "earning" his salvation.  Jesus did that already, free and clear.  It is a matter of someone formerly in bondage, now freed, using the tools to transform himself into what he was created to be, that is, in perfect, loving communion with God.

Sin is sin

The title seems to be one of those things that kind of goes without saying, but I do have a specific point herein.  When we read the newspaper, when we hear from someone else about this or that "sin" or "crime", we really shouldn't be surprised.  People sin, people commit crimes and, unfortunately, doing so is typical.  Our fallen nature has turned us into selfish creatures.  And even worse, we are quick to judge and condemn others for their sins and crimes, but we are also quick to excuse or explain away our own sins.
When we hear of someone else's sins, our first response should not be "oh, what a horrible person", but rather, "oh yeah, I have sins in my own life that are uncomfortably similar to that." If we would only have as much grace and forgiveness with others that we would like to have for ourselves.

Needs

I typically don’t understand other people very well and I don’t understand emotions, in myself or in others.  Granted, from a logical perspective, I can understand why certain events or situations can cause duress and grief in someone (myself included), but emotionally, not so much. 

That being said, I do understand that people have needs (myself included) and I’ve come to realize that those needs, when not met, can cause horrible things to happen.   “Not seeing the forest for the trees”, “blind to oneself”, “one cannot watch oneself from the outside”, these sayings and more go a long-ways to explain what takes place.  When any one particular need is not met, one, through self-blindness will reach out, sometimes in very bizarre and destructive ways, in an attempt to fulfill those needs. 

The big question, in my mind at least, is what does one do to alleviate/avoid these situations, especially when seeing or understanding these needs does not come naturally?  And secondly, how does one respond “after the fact”?  What does one do when damage has already been done, when personality has already been formed, when decisions have been made that cannot be undone? 

Speaking retrospectively really is not that helpful, but can be for other situations. So to recognize and avoid the problem, the first step would be to ask the question, “What are the needs?”  I cannot even begin to articulate just how difficult this process can be (or typically is).  Learning to ask the question (to one’s self) and then knowing how to take care of the needs of that person, all the while doing so in a loving, non-invasive, non-derogatory manner.  Maybe this is simple and straightforward for some people, but certainly not for me.  

Ask the question, “What is the need?”

Not arbitrary

I’m not talking about some arbitrary religious rules, fabricated by tired, bitter old men, who are only looking to impose and control.  I am talking about short term and long term reality.  You may not like the boundaries that are identified by the Church as non-negotiable.  You may argue that you have the right to love whomever you wish, to put whatever you wish into your own body and to live in any way that you see fit as long as it does not interfere with anyone else, but it simply does not work that way.

Reality, as it is, is corporate, spiritual and physical.  It simply is not valid to argue that you having sex with someone else is simply a physical act between two consenting adults.  Yes, it is physical and consensual, but it is much more than that.  There is a spiritual side to people that is very real and tangible.  

This is not meant to be an argument or a proof.  I’m not interested in having a debate and to prove myself right and you wrong.  I want you to understand what Christianity is, the claims that it is making and what is expected of you in this physical/spiritual reality in which we live. You can reject the claims and authority of the Church, but doing so is akin to rejecting the power and authority of gravity.  The end result will not be beneficial.  

You need to learn the difference between getting what you want and getting what is best.  Hopefully, the two eventually become the same thing, i.e., you transform yourself into the person that is seeking the best possible results in every situation.  The reality of this growth and development process is, I believe, why we have families and a father figure.  As a child is growing up, he has an immense amount of learning to achieve. Having someone in authority over you, directing you in the way that is most advantageous is to your benefit.  By the time you become 18 years old, you should be in a position to continue the path upon which your parents have started you.  You still have authority over you (the Church and the police), but these are incidental.  In other words, you should already be moving in the right direction, with a need for occasional correction and advice.  

Every decision that is made should be built upon what we have learned is good and right and true, not upon what we feel like doing at the moment. This brings us back to the first line of this post.  The boundaries that define reality for us are not arbitrary.  The decisions we make will be motivated by the boundaries we have learned and embraced. Don’t throw away what is real, in order to grasp and revel in what is false and destructive.  Anything that is outside the boundaries of good and true will only lead to death.

Maxims, platitudes and pithy sayings

I've been thinking about these short little sayings that some people like to use and speak with authority.  Even those found in Scripture. These are problematic.  Obviously, the intent of the original author and the actual meaning of these texts are probably good (certainly good if found in Scripture), but that is not the issue here.  The issue is interpretation.
In many cases, when someone uses one of these, there is a level of personal interpretation taking place.  For example, "Fear God and love man." To use this phrase toward someone who has grown up in a physically abusive home will most likely result in them associating fear of God with fear of an abusive father.  Not a good thing.  The two word phrase "Fear God" is far too terse to adequately communicate what one actually means.
Maxims, platitudes and pithy sayings are fine and good, if one has the time to clarify and explain what exactly is meant.  But then at that point, the whole "value" of brevity is lost.  What can be said in a few words, if needing to be explained, then cannot be said in a few words.  Learning to speak openly, directly and clearly is where real interactive value is.  Someone will remember our words if not too short or too long and if spoken in love.
Terse or long winded, if we speak in love we can go a long ways.

Telling a good story

When we read the gospels, a large percentage of Jesus’ teaching is done via story.  Jesus tells a good story to communicate a truth that is helpful to his listeners.  I think it is valuable to see this potential everywhere.  One relatively difficult aspect of this learning to see/hear the story as a means to learn, as a tool for gaining further or deeper understanding. 

One only needs to look at Hollywood to see that storytelling is a huge industry, that is very popular.  Unfortunately, a very large portion of the stories that are told are absolute garbage, but the reality of what is taking place should not be ignored.  

We know from history that storytelling is widely loved.  We should recognize the value of this tool and learn to glean from the stories that we hear, what is valuable and what is not.  We should not simply sit back and allow the author to pour his version of reality into our heads without questioning and analyzing what is going in.  It is our responsibility as adults and as Christians to be fully aware and critical of this. 

So the point?  Learn to think, learn to analyze, learn to be critical.  Every book we read and every movie we see is telling a story.  Is the story true, in regards to the worldview that is being promoted?  Is the story beneficial?  Does it provide something for us to grow in, in understanding, in knowledge, in wisdom?  Can we take, even the simplest or rudimentary storyline and extract something valuable?  Or do we simply waste our time being mindlessly entertained, gaining nothing from our spent two hours?  Make good use of your time, even your "off" time.  We actually have very little.

They call me.... Tim?

All humor aside (as well as references to Monty Python), the concept of naming is a powerful one.  Essentially, to name something is to show authority over it.  This is why God named Adam and Eve, why Adam named all of the animals and why Adam and Eve named their children. When God called Abram out of Ur, he renamed him Abraham.  When God called Jacob and sent him, he re-named him Israel.  From a biblical perspective, we can see what naming is doing.
But this leads me to another thought.  When we look at the world today, or at least the world of 150 years ago, civilized people had "Christian" names.  When someone of a non-European culture came into contact with Europeans and embraced the culture, they often took a "Christian" name, because having a name connects one to the foundation of that culture.
We are seeing the reverse taking place in our culture today.  As America and other European countries move away from Christian foundations, the names that are being embraced is following suit.  We are seeing an influx of non-Christian names, that is, names that do not come from a Christian culture.  The names that are taken or given are communicating a cultural foundation, or at least a deliberate move away from a Christian one.
This is not to argue that people with names from traditionally non-Christian cultures cannot be Christian. The Christian faith is not about any one particular culture or race.  Jesus Christ sacrificed himself for all men, not just white Europeans.
As a closing note, it is interesting that when someone is baptized into the Eastern Orthodox church, they are given a new name, the name of a saint, someone recognized as being particularly holy.  This is a great connection to have and to regularly bring to mind.