Contrary to popular belief...

Today has been a good day. I...

• slept in (until 9:30am!)
• read a couple chapters of "Dead Souls" by Gogol, which is a hilarious Russian piece of satire.
• drank some french press coffee in the meantime.
• read some of Bearing Fresh Olive Leaves (have both agreements and disagreements concerning his opinions)
• Listened to good ol' Baroque music, as well as a couple sacred choral ensembles while I read, which I highly recommend.

And..that is all so far. But it's a pretty darn ideal day for me, necessary at least once a week. I am now pondering this question:

• Is something moral because God says so, or does God say so because it is moral?

I'm pretty sure popular opinion in the Christian world, at least, would give a simple, frank explanation that the first option is the true one. Of course God is the definition of "Good", so therefore anything God says is moral. BUT there is a problem with this.

If the first option is true, if "all morality rests on the spoken word or action of a divine being "God"', then what makes morality necessarily “good”? For example, what if God said it was okay to murder or rape (which, in some religious texts, he does)? This understanding of morality as under God's control makes morality subjective to God's whims, thoughts, reactions, and opinions. 

If the second option is true, if "God says so because it is moral", then morality transcends God. And to many, nothing can transcend God. 

So which is "true?"

My opinion is still forming on this issue. Kierkegaard's thought about the teleological suspension of the ethical (the idea that God is above human ethics and that humans can be permitted to do unethical things because God commands it, like the Abraham sacrificing Isaac story) makes sense on paper, but the problem I have is: How does one know if a "suspension of the ethical" was truly God-ordained? Any person who is mad and intends to do harm can claim that God destined him to perform this act of harm. If Abraham were alive today and sacrificed his son Isaac in God's name, we all would think he was a nut-case.


I do believe that morality is subjective in some ways, because something that could be immoral in one circumstance is permissible and even necessary in another circumstance. 


An example of this would be if a man was dying of starvation and came upon a grain field or an apple orchard that was cultivated by a landowner. Is it morally "right" for this man to steal from another's production to feed himself, and even steal the seeds from that fruit to cultivate for his own food? 


Aka: Is it morally acceptable for this starving man to steal from a man who has plenty in order to survive? Technically, no, this would not be acceptable. But in theory, and even in reality, we all might permit it. 


I am interested in a diversity of opinion and dialogue on this matter. But this I believe: that morality has flux, cannot be contained in a black and white picture, if you will, contrary to popular belief. Something that is immoral in one culture is perfectly moral in another culture, and that is okay with me. The Bible does not have easy answers to philosophical questions, contrary to popular belief. And that the Bible does not have all the answers, period, contrary to popular belief. The Bible is literary in nature, which is interpretive. So we must think, interpret, guide, perceive, and reckon with each other and for ourselves.

stop and read the books.

What does it take to be a person who makes something of the world? Who changes things? Who gets things done?

Pretend your life is a room. I feel like Christians today feel so satisfied with rearranging the "furniture" of life (if you will) and maintaining the clutter that we do nothing to actually change anything about the room. We don't do anything drastic, like repaint the walls or lay down new carpet. We are satisfied with doing the very least just to get by in life. We are so busy putting the books in alphabetical order and don't take the time to read them. Maybe we should stop focusing so much on not doing the wrong things, and focus on doing more things right.

One verse I read a couple days ago sparked this train of thought.

"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him." Romans 8:16-17 (emphasis mine)

Provided is the word that got me. Some versions say "if" or "if so be that". Does this mean that if I don't suffer, I am not an heir of God? It seems that Paul has emphasized that in order to share in God's glory, we must suffer in this life. I am still learning what this means, and it may take a lifetime and beyond for me to understand this. As Cody puts it, "If everything is going right, there must be something wrong." But I think that statement is too simple. It is okay for things to go right. Success is not wrong. But the great thing about Christianity is that neither is failure. Failure, the valley of the shadow of death (Ps. 23), hard times, depression, call it what you will, is a sign that you are trying. You can't fail if you haven't taken the risk of failure. And those risks, all that stretching we do, that bending over backwards in life, that suffering for Christ, will all be worth it when we reach the comfort the end brings. But if you don't feel the need to suffer for Christ like He did for you, the challenge is: What business do you have calling yourself a Christian? Are you a Christian only because of what God has done for you? What about the reason He came-to free us from the fact that we could never repay Him?

We need to be stepping up as Christians and taking the risk. We need to be uncomfortable because we realize we aren't doing enough, because God's mercy is too infinite for us to ever repay him. So paint the rooms of your life. Gut the whole frickin' house. Don't just organize your bookshelf-read the books.

temperance.

Sip The Lights, originally uploaded by NatashaP.

When in doubt, ask C.S. Lewis. :)

(defining a few words for you first:

temperance: moderation or self-restraint, esp. in eating or drinking.

teetotalism: choosing abstinence from alcohol.

Mohammedanism: The Islam religion.)

“Temperance is, unfortunately, one of those words that has changed its meaning. It now usually means teetotalism. But in the days when the second Cardinal virtue was christened “Temperance”, it meant nothing of the sort. Temperance referred not specially to drink, but to all pleasures; and it meant not abstaining, but going the right length and no further. It is a mistake to think that Christians ought all to be teetotalers; Mohammedanism, not Christianity, is the teetotal religion. Of course it may be the duty of a particular Christian, or of any Christian, at a particular time, to abstain from strong drink, either because he is the sort of man who cannot drink at all without drinking too much, or because he is with people who are inclined to drunkenness and must not encourage them by drinking himself. But the whole point is that he is abstaining, for a good reason, from something which he does not condemn and which he likes to see other people enjoying. One of the marks of a certain type of bad man is that he cannot give up a thing himself without wanting every one else to give it up. That is not the Christian way. An individual Christian may see fit to give up all sorts of things for special reasons-marriage, or meat, or beer, or the cinema; but the moment he starts saying the things are bad in themselves, or looking down his nose at other people who do use them, he has taken the wrong turning.
One great piece of mischief has been done by the modern restriction of the word Temperance to the question of drink. It helps people to forget that you can be just as intemperate about lots of other things. A man who makes his golf or his motor-bicycle the centre of his life, or a woman who devotes all her thoughts to clothes or bridge or her dog, is being just as ’intemperate’ as someone who gets drunk every evening. Of course, it does not show on the outside so easily: bridge-mania or golf-mania do not make you fall down the middle of the road. But God is not deceived by externals." -C. S. Lewis

My Response:

The meaning of “temperance” in the Christian world has turned from moderation to abstinence. This is the misunderstanding found in innumerable churches today. Even our stark founding fathers' Puritan lifestyle allowed drinking in moderation! And these people wouldn't go so far as to write poetry because it was too creative. They stuck to letters and documents so they wouldn't use strong terms to describe what could be personal 'sinful' emotions.

The Bible calls us to be ‘beyond reproach’. But the problem is that a person can always find something to reproach us for. It is only a matter of time, because we are all flawed. Maybe the way to help non-Christians understand Christianity is not to live a lifestyle of abstinence in order to show them a different life, but live the lifestyle of moderation to show them self-control, patience, goodness, and God. We do not live a different life than non-Christians: we are all humans breathing the same air. The difference is our actions, and there is nothing inherently wrong with alcohol. A non-Christian who drinks can better associate with the testimony of a young man who drinks with him and never gets out-of-hand more than a man who turns down a drink because he 'has never taken a sip'. How can a non-Christian drinker relate to that? The point is, God can use both the Christian who drinks and the Christian who has never taken a sip. But most of all, non-Christians don't need us to abstain from alcohol for proof that God is real. If they do, they have bigger problems than you can help them with. They need to understand that humans are humans; Christians are humans just like them. The only difference between me and a drunkard is that I am saved by grace.

“Temperate temperance is best; intemperate temperance injures the cause of temperance.”
–Martin Luther

finally, done.

I am a thirteen-year-old Christian. I was born again on July 13, 1995, if a date is truly necessary, kneeled beside my bed at nighttime. Understanding this, I should have been through my 'Jesus' toddler years, jumping off a coffee table with child-like faith that He indeed will catch me. I should be well on my way through grammer school, having passed 3rd grade when I memorized my Christian multiplication tables and learned to write in Christian cursive. I should be going through Christian puberty about now, falling for my Savior more and more with each day that passes. I should be forming into the Christian woman God asks of me.

Is this what I am?

Why do I feel like a Christian 3rd grader sitting in time-out because she just won't cooperate?

I don't want my faith to become a phase I went through, oh, you know, that one time, when it all made sense. Faith is not about believing God when it is easy or self-beneficial or even when it all makes sense. Frankly, sometimes it doesn't.

I have no idea how to pray, because everytime I do, I barely speak a sentence before I see the words hit the ceiling, one by one, and bounce back to me and choke me. For the type of person I am, prayer will always be difficult, because I am a practical person who likes to talk to people as they are, and of course God is how He is, but how He is, is not where I am. I don't like talking to people on the phone, let alone telling God about my day when He not only knows more about it than I do, but He doesn't magically send me air-texts back. I don't 'feel' Him 'speaking'. So I write. But, of course, He doesn't write back. I don't hold it against Him, and I don't expect anything more. Prayer is simply the most awkward part of life on earth as a thirteen-year-old Christian.

So I am a Christian who never keeps her promises to God. I have read my Bible perhaps a handful of times in the past year, because reading the Bible is like going to the gym. Before I go, I feel a familiar sense of dread...the kind that doesn't fade with time, the kind that will remain after I die, even when Jesus wants to rock out to some Tim McGraw and run the treadmill with me. But when I actually hop on the treadmill and start running, it is exhilerating and makes me feel more alive. So all I have to do is open the Bible a crack every day, and know it is exhilerating. Know it will make me more alive. But, I don't.

I am a Christian who feels her prayers are worthless. And I am a thirteen-year-old Christian, held back so many years because I refuse to learn, I refuse to love like He has loved, I refuse to jump off the coffee table and watch Him catch me. I refuse to do anything except to grunt every now and then on my uncomfortable time-out chair, that I convince myself is actually quite comfortable because I have warmed up the seat for all this time.

And I know I will turn from this white screen with black letters and repeat my same patterns, all over again, and I will be a broken thirteen-year-old Christian turned cold and apathetic. And I will hurt God again and again, and be a stubborn child He has to continually discipline and calm and woo. But He knows this too, and He knows that I know.

And the funny thing is, I think, with this realization, I am finally done with my time-out.