Weary of the Theory

Well everyone, time for a post on my Worldly Monk Theology Blog. I want to share an article that is the best writing about feminism that I have read. It has to do with Mary, which also is a topic that sometimes is not thought about that well. 

https://comment.org/the-marian-gift-of-dependence/

 

In addition to sharing that article, I will add my own belated and minimal contribution to the whole wave of feminist theory. The thing I suggest is relevant is the church as Jesus’s girlfriend.  Basically, the church’s survival and advancement, success and work over hundreds of years. It is very much a story of a sci-fi heroine who also fights alongside the ultimate Lord of hosts. The captain of all the armies in heaven, plus his beautiful girlfriend who also defeats all the monsters and enemies.  All of them. Not a single lash of Satan triumphs against the church.

 

When I was taught some Presbyterian theology a long time ago, which is the Tulip acronym, there is a mention of “perseverance of the saints.” I think it refers to the fact that the church will be found faithful.  I always doubted it because I was such a failure and being so overwhelmed by other people’s sinful culture at a horrible bookstore retail job. I just knew I would not do well on Judgement day, so I wondered in my mind why they couldn’t get it right and say “preservation of the saints,” at least to emphasize God’s mercy. But it is perseverance.  And I did accept that and not argue. 

 

But now I see it, what a fighter and winner the church is.  How it comes through for people with strength and love.  And how it is opposed so cruelly and captured at times when all seems lost.  Literally, when all seem lost. 

 

But it doesn’t just get saved, it rolls along with its righteousness from God within and is instructed to be “worthy of the calling."

 

So I think that some good feminism might be rooted in not just that truth but the reality itself, the nature of God and his people, and those who find their way with that kind of dedication are doing so as a likely participation in what is the ultimate universal triumph of good over evil.

 

Personally I think that is a very relevant example for someone like me to suddenly mention after years of weak singleness and a lack of engagement in the sometimes “fruitless” discussions about working mothers, or the south’s faulty, shameful, incessant nagging for people to look prettier so they could be righteous through marriage instead of Jesus’s blood.

The Worst Christmas Pageant Ever

 Well everyone, I just wrote the main post but thought of something else to share, which is something I learned the hard way.  And the thing is to figure out and even profess regularly that none of us are Jesus.  People say, well, of course we don’t claim that, but actually it is very common to get so carried away with trying to be like Jesus that people can’t admit the gaping difference that accounts for why our faces get ground in the dirt every day by life’s worldly abusers. Example: When I go to the ER for my gallbladder, I don’t say to the guy in a stretcher, “Arise and walk, your sins are forgiven.”  I don’t say to a neighbor asking for cereal, “Before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times.”  I don’t say to a lady on the bus, “Your daughter is healed at this very moment.” I mean obviously I am joking, but people’s re-enactments of Jesus’s life go that far off track all the time.  Maybe it is a cute blessing for God to see us so weakly imitate our hero like children. But frankly there are many people who get trapped in an acting habit that can only be relieved by secular society. What is a real example, you might ask.  Well for one thing, look at our cultural problems.  Think of the things some people had to do to survive, while the rest of the insulated church seemed to stay righteous. It’s either sin, or not risking sin enough to reach people. Both things are what I am talking about.  And often the exhausted and exasperated people who have to give up on their idealistic Christian ambitions actually are in that moment, more like Christ. 

War and Peace

 Hi everyone, every now and then, I think of a post for this blog, even though I already published it as a book.  And I want to share something helpful as people prepare to probably fight another war.  Here is an interesting verse from when Jesus was about to be crucified: John 17:36: 

³⁶ Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

 

So this usually highlights how Jesus was giving up his life and not fighting back.  And it was in fact the most merciful thing ever.  We should try to follow Jesus’s example as much as we can.

 

However this verse says something else that is very interesting to consider, which is that Jesus said his followers would in fact fight if they were defending an earthly kingdom.

 

Well he says would and not should, but I think he still presents this as an additional example of how much to use force to ensure people’s safety and well being as part of nations and communities.  The fact is that we aren’t Jesus, and though we pray and work for God’s will to be on earth as it is in heaven, most of us depend on government, rules, law, and justice of some sort.  A lot of us got used to it early in life and assumed we would always be doing mercy work. 

 

But here, with history’s spotlight on his every word, Jesus points out that it is more than appropriate for good people, and followers of Jesus, to use force against threats to their dearest communities, cities, and nations.  Our lives are very earthly, no matter how much we overlap with eternity and heaven. There is too much ignorance about this, partially because a lot of us started thinking so much about heaven and hell.  But even from that mindset, the teaching is there for people to learn that sometimes force is authorized and consistent with God’s teaching.

 

A lot of people who think they are above things like the death penalty, jail, cops, and armies, are acutally far, far beneath it, unworthy, and part of the reason bad guys get away with too much every day.

Other people’s Utmost for your Highest Greedy Ambition

Ok everyone, this is a topic that could extend into all kinds of societal trends and political ideas, like supremacy, and other church problems.  But I am sticking with the core of the matter which has to do with a challenge of doing everything you can for God and other people while participating in a society that involves interdependence and dependence.  What I am saying is that giving all you can give can sometimes also overlap with greed, of getting all you can get, and to maintain any unselfish goals requires caution about how much other people might be exploited in even the most innocent processes of “doing everything you can.” In other words, whenever we try to max out our own potential with the purest of motives, we still are usually functioning in a multi-resource system that incorporates other people’s efforts.  So as producers it is likely we are also simultaneously consumers in some way.

That is where this can be a whole book but what I am saying is that whole communities and cultures should be coordinating together for highest ends if they really want to please God, and individuals who have that goal on their own must figure out how much they can achieve their own righteous endeavors without crunching those who are leveraged into contributing without their own goals being satisfied.  Well this is where bad people might have an opportunity to see how they can clog the system or create a blackmail effect that slows down well-meaning people. That is definitely a sad thing that many will no doubt get caught for by the auditors of heaven.  Matthew Henry in his commentary on the Gospel of Matthew said the conscience is an auditor, so maybe the people who ruin things for everyone already know that about themselves.  But what I am saying is that when we have a feeling that nothing we do is good enough and we keep trying to please whoever we try to please anyway, there could be other people getting crunched in that machine as well.  

 

The most simple example is giving money to charity.  Well that is so nice, but doesn’t it mean getting a paycheck, and is that maxed out at any cost?  Well if you are doing good things to earn it, then all it does is multiply the goodness.  And yet we know that some people don’t do right. So during the “Get what you can get” phase, which usually does precede the give what you can give phase, is there someone else’s utmost that you are spending, and are they okay with that?  Maybe they should be and deserve some misery if they can’t get with the program.  Or maybe almost everyone has underestimated the power of working together for one good Cause.

What are you spending on your spending?

As I think about this topic, I feel that I have a whole book to say and could someday have the credibility for other people to learn from it.  But for a blog post I am only going to share the exact concept of the title, which is the idea that some success in saving money actually requires extravagant spending of strength and attention.  And the second thing to add is what could bother some people, which is that it might not be worth it.

 

I have said in other posts that I strongly believe a key thing to learn in life is that there are multiple overlapping economies of hundreds of blessings or efforts, and not all value is reflected in any financial economy, which is also likely to have layers and unaccounted resources.  

 

But what I am saying now is that when people try to be good with their money, there are a lot of options.  In a way I could say, what is needed is a whole life offering to God, so really you have to spend everything you have.  And I do believe that, but in terms of day-to-day budgeting, I actually have the opposite thing to say, which is that people might do well to not obsess about it and instead try to have just a few good habits. 

 

For me, in my successful years of financial faithfulness, it was a matter of not spending more than I had, and making sure I was generous.  I also tried to give ten percent to anything Christian, which usually wasn’t my church.  This is where my post becomes more like book material, and I will say I really think that during a certain 12 years, I was probably in a 99^th percentile of financial faithfulness.  I heartily prescribe that to other people, though everyone has different lives and a lot of people really suffer and have kids to take care of, etc.

 

People could get mad even at my little headline, but I know it is a good concept to think of.  There are two other phases of my life that are different, where I lived rather haphazardly on loan money from my parents, based on my probable and to me, due success as an author, and now, after some unexplained farce of rejection, a time of suffering when I am totally dependent on other people because of disability.  The people I am dependent on, which is taxpayers and my mom, are actually people who I think have “spent a lot on their spending.”  In other words, severe frugality and life cost to make sure money is not wasted.  And because of the limited resources that actually might not be a coincidence from that, I am both abpruptly and gradually reverting back to my old habits of general faithfulness on a small “salary.”

 

That is more personal info than I usually include in these worldly monk posts, but I think it is a good topic to think about, because there are many approaches to managing money, and to me, even some of the most popular books about it are misoriented.  What I am suggesting is not a joke, and the fact that my success and reward is currently obscured by abuse, loss and horrifically, financial dependence, will never reverse or undo the truth of how blessed my life was for many years as I survived as a humble and generous person with the budget that was granted to me by God, already minimized by greedy people who will never be satisfied by their unfair gain.

 

What are you spending on your spending?  Are you a coupon person? It could be a good idea. But leaving big tips and forgetting about money altogether also has its reward. That is all I will say. People can get mad and probably will. That is another economy of emotions that can also function with choices of investment in feeling better or living life with other goals.  

 

My book about this will probably only be available or accepted when I am dead, partially because this life-giving truth is the exact reason why people would want to kill me.

“Why do evangelicals talk to us like we’re stupid?”

I felt it almost every Sunday at the church I went to.  Songs that translated ideas from the bible in such a way that there almost wasn’t any meaning left.  People assuming you were an idiot because you were depressed.  Leaders who almost had to literally move your arms and legs for you as part of their act to use you in their conversion scenes. It was from some kind of ignorance, some kind of neglect to love as Christ loved, and some kind of motivation that caused people to be directors for a babyish play while we suffered in an agonizing moral crisis everywhere else we went.   

But I am going to have to defend people a little bit and say that there is a legitimate mistake in the mix, which is that it actually is pretty stupid not to follow Jesus Christ, and especially not to care.  God gave humanity and most individuals a lot of information about what really matters, and more than information, the actual blessings of common grace. And as evangelicals have watched people all around us choose a worthless life of abuse and waste, forfeiting the eternal rewards of basic church service, they can’t help but condescend with their own matching ignorance.
 
It's kind of comical to be a Christian for thirty years and have people assume you don’t know how to pray, all because you are sitting in the “audience” at church instead of standing up front, which is the one thing they would never let you do.  But at the same time, you have to kind of see it how they see it sometimes, like “why aren’t you one of us?” Gosh, I still have to say, you said it, not me, but I also have to say that the comedy is in their favor.  That their inferior culture expressions become almost like a God-inspired mockery of the true retardation in question, which is people’s stubborn, foolish persecution that we will never understand and never will have to.

A Bad Climate Indeed

When I was in seventh grade, I read a book about the creation and evolution debate, called “Inherit the Wind.” It is actually a play, and I think I went and saw it performed with a friend of mine from church. We had a nice discussion about how evolution and genesis were probably both true.  I was twelve years old.  

Later, in high school, I made a poster for my biology class about evolution, where I made the word “evolution,” evolve across the cardboard, and I tore a page of Genesis from an old bible and glued it next to some kind of science diagram that represented natural selection.  
 
I mention those two examples to say that I have a history of being a nice reasonable person who should not be portrayed as some kind of “William Jennings Bryant” religious freak who doesn’t believe in chemical reactions and photosynthesis.
 
But I am.  Everyone from my faith background is treated like garbage in the news and everywhere else, and the new context used against us is climate change.  It is the same political problem as usual, but I have to say that the pattern is as recognizable as the usual snake patterns found in the other worst parts of nature.  It is a complete media assault, also prevelant in schools that people pay to attend, and it will forever be seen for what it is.
 
Do you want to know my theory? I think some animals across time prayed to God in their distress, similar to us now, asked for help to survive, and received merciful mutations that gloriously lasted for hundreds of millions of years: generations of animal descendants who will be found faithful in God’s sight.  
 
Meanwhile, some species didn’t do so well, and have found their dodo birds of a feather with aggressive greedy liberals who only know how to prey on mistreated religious people or other swindled students who chose to obey God anyway with supernatural patience during another thirty-year attempt to warp religious life into a feeding trough of humiliation for devolved demons, many of which were probably the evolution champions of the 50s.
 
If you want to make climate change the new religion, you can, but I think the embarrassment will be yours if you can’t bring yourself to also acknowledge the realities of heaven and hell, or even earth, for that matter.

Sacred, Secular, Sacred Secular

 Ok everyone, here is an interesting idea.  It has to do with divisions of things that are sacred vs secular, which many times is a false division and some things are supposed to just be "good." That has been discussed many times in many contexts.  But I want to add an idea which is another possible category of "sacred secular," which would refer to things that are supposed to be secular and are sacred because of their secularity.  Like a movie that is not supposed to be religious and isn't.  Or just a fruit stand with fruit.  Or a coke machine.  Okay so that is the idea, it is kind of simple, but think also how it could get ruined, or "profaned." Such as when people mix sacred with secular in a bad way.  I don't mean to judge but one example is a particular yucky feeling from the unitarian mistakes, like that certain sense that all the religions got mixed together in a bad way.  Or when you go get a barbecue sandwich at a restaurant and they are playing really extreme christian music and it is like, okay, I am just getting a sandwich.   I think some people really are "good unitarians," and there is also such thing as a good evangelical witness in a more secular environment.  But I just wanted to suggest that there could be some nice worldliness that has its place, and to point out that secular isn't the same word meaning as "profane." Would I go so far as to say there is such thing as "sacred profane?" Actually, probably yes. Like that really well timed curse word or something like that. One more example that I think people can relate to is when a lot of people used to skip church on Sunday and read the New York Times.  It could be a happy thing sitting in the sunlight with coffee and reading the news during free time on the weekend.  That is what I mean by sacred secular. However, now the New York Times more actively and overtly persecutes evangelicals, so it is an example of how the sacred secular has been ruined and defaced into an ugly horror reminiscent of that bad feeling you get when a doctor molests you.

Offense and Defense

 

Ok everyone, here is another actual question I have on my theology blog instead of just an opinion or something I have learned.  It has to do with “isms,” and when legitimate religion turns into a problem “ism,” and a sort of idolatry problem.  That was what happened with Catholicism on such a mass scale that the Reformation happened and some Christians started a new branch of Christianity without ever looking back.  The religion had folded in on itself and people were no longer freely worshipping God but entangled by idolatry and self-justification of all sorts. Much later on, in our country, some geniuses eventually coined the term “fundamentalism,” and suggested that the same thing was happening with Protestantism, only it was the skeletal basics of Christianity that had become the new distraction from God himself.  

 

I personally, in both cases, think that the fact that actual Jesus is involved and is prayed to in each belief system, offers supernatural protection from total loss, and that it is most likely that the religion itself and especially God’s goodness will still win out and benefit individuals and society. However, it is a very interesting topic, and bad stuff does happen in God’s name all the time from all of it.  It is a very common type of “taking God’s name in vain,” though most people associate that with more instant sins of saying G- dm and OMG.  

 

So anyway, this brings me to my theological question, which is whether than can be something like “Jesus-ism” or God-ism, as well, where an actual truth-based relationship with God can also become some kind of barrier to health and life.  And I think maybe the answer is possibly, in some ways, but mostly that is the point of why you worship God with no other Gods before him, is because he has the infinitude to absorb worship without anything bouncing back to harm people.  So that if you can weave through those other corruptible mazes, you do hit something that delivers and by nature and definition protects you from the Ism Idolatries.

 

This is also why I don’t support witch hunts against fundamentalists.  It is just too likely that despite any amount of intellectual or cultural poverty, some of those prayers will be real and answered in ways that tap into all the resources and truth that exist.

What does it all mean

 

Ok everyone, this is just another correction of something I have said before, though I think I should be able to use hyperbole in a rant to make a point.  But anyway I recently said that Chrsitianity was the only true religion, and I mostly do believe that, but want to point out that actual, accurate Christianity is actually Judeo-Christianity.  And people have often talked about “Judeo-Christian” values, and the success that happens when people like Jews and Christians work together.  But I want to say that just plain Christianity by itself is inherently “Judeo-Christian.” So what some people are talking about is actually “Judeo-Judeo Christian.” It has to do with why the Old Testament is part of the Bible, and totally legit and not lesser. So anyway, there are theological discussions of what all can count as “Judaism” and someone’s personal “old testament” in their life or religion or historical background.  It is very interesting and also has to do with systems of mercy and justice.  So I just wanted to mention that on my theology blog because I think a lot of Christians and maybe even most of us have not thought of Christianity as being already “Judeo-Christian.” All people say is “hey, Jesus was Jewish,” but that gets old, and one of the reasons it does is because all of reality is relevant to the discussion, not just one guy’s bloodline.

A large country called Reality

 

This is a post I have been meaning to write for a while on a topic that obviously calls for further thought. Partially it is a correction and realization of something I mentioned in a paper I wrote for a school program.  In the paper, I was writing about why Jewish people are so often persecuted, and that is not a light topic.  I am not talking about people getting a bad grade unfairly or being uninvited to parties.  I am of course referencing things like mass murder and the holocaust.  So anyway I said it was because of both race and religion, but after being in a habit now for a while of thinking of things in threes, I see that there is a third identity factor for a whole people and that is the concept of “nation.”  So it is race, religion, and nation.  And currently Israel has a chunk taken out of it called Palestine which is officially recognized on some maps and supported by many political people from other know-it-all places like some of the United States.  I don’t know what will happen with all of that. I personally support extending Israel’s borders into Syria and Iraq to create a safe zone with new rules and culture in the middle east.  But anyway I mention that also because I think that the “race, religion, nation,” identity combo for populations is also relevant to why people want Christian nationalism in the United States.  It was something that did exist more organically for a while but was lost.  But part of what that Christian nation tried to provide was another trio called “liberty and justice ‘for all.’”  “For all” is the third part of another set of three things.  It really is a helpful thing to look for those trilogy combos, and something that people used to do more when some amount of Christian education was the standard for most thought.  That too, was lost, and there will be a cost to it, though I am in the camp that sees a lot of it as sacrificial outreach that will reap a good harvest of inclusion instead of total destruction.  But anyway, that “liberty and justice for all” trinity had a different mission than just forcing everyone to subscribe to the main religion, and religious liberty was something that people did try to offer as a nation, and actually succeeded with in some ways.  And people who want to fight that are having to in some ways make their aggressive politics turn into a new religion itself, which I believe will be exponentially a worse embarrassment than pipe dreams of Christian nationalism.  This post is kind of political to put on my theology blog, but notice the concepts. It is very theological and these principles will not be skipped or ignored successfully by anyone.

A Concept called Righteousness Privilege

 

Hi everyone, I’m putting this topic on my theology blog though it could go on my mental health blog.  It is a topic that I have a delayed idea of but have been aware of twice in academic contexts where it really would have been valuable to share.  And the concept is basically something called “righteousness privilege.”  At social work school, our textbook mentioned “Christian privilege,” and I didn’t appreciate it and saw it mostly as an anti-religious bias. Later, in a short certificate program about medieval Christianity, I said I sometimes felt like monks were privileged. But I partially forgot about the real reasons I have for feeling that way, which mostly aren’t financial, like a lot of privilege is, but it has to do with good deeds and kindness and the circumstances that allow you to successfully keep your own moral standards and follow Jesus Christ in an effective way. Not everyone is remotely allowed to be at their best and serve others how they would want to or might if they were taught better.  I actually think that this could be a whole book and I could write about forty pages on it right now.  But this blog is not like that and I also don’t even want to do a three page rant like what is currently on my regular blog.  I just want to introduce the concept and say that within all the overlapping economies of poverty and wealth, that there is this other thing that people dearly want called being good, which can also be a form of beauty.  And that on some levels it can be bought or earned, but on many levels, it can’t, and that the way Jesus Christ made the real thing not just available to anyone but actually only available through his own sacrifice is the core gift of Christianity. It is a costly justice that in all cases is also merciful and withstands any worldly accusations of favoritism or just plain falseness. The relevant fact is that what God for us did was so precious and undeserved by anyone that you don’t call it privilege and complain when other people have it.  You ask for it yourself and then try to have some sign of it in your own life among whatever corruption there also is, whether it is just a few prideful thoughts in a very righteous life, or even the sin by negation where you let yourself be good without caring about other people being bad from either oppression or ignorance.

            I don’t know if I should add to this now but another thing to consider is situations where some people are deriving their goodness in a system where their value is based on maintaining other people’s lack of righteousness in comparison.  Think evangelism, jail settings, school and volunteering, or client work of any kind.  Also, people who didn’t bother to help anyone at all sometimes feel clean in comparison to those who find themselves with some unfair leverage.  To me, this is an interesting topic where some of the true traction of power and persecution discussions are.  And I know that it was not fair for this to be out of reach in social work school, and that very justice withheld is exactly what is hidden when people suppress the truth of Christian religion.

Failed Evangelism as Predestination

Ok, should I say Evangelicalism? Not everything is about problems in my own time and country.  But this is an interesting theological topic that has to do with people’s rejection of the gospel of Jesus Christ, or maybe the church’s failure to present the true gospel that is by nature “irresistible.” So here we go, this is presbyterian theology.  The idea is this: the great commission that Jesus gave his disciples after a total defeat of all death and his own acceptance of all authority in heaven and earth says “Go make disciples of all men.”  All men, and yet any thorough survey of the bible would at least call into question most “lapses” into universalism.  On some eternal level, most Christians believe that there end up being saints and aints.  That’s actually not something I am questioning that much in this post, though sometimes I do try to think of how some people might like being in hell. But what I am wondering about is whether people’s personal failure and even all too fast giving up on sharing their faith is not just one of God’s tools for destiny but actually his main strategy for choosing who will be redeemed. And that the most human aspect of it, which can even in totality be seen as personal achievement or failure, might be exactly proportionally the most key factor in predestination.  I say that based on the great commission only, though verses like John 3:16 might also be relevant.  This idea that salvation really was meant for everyone, and that the task of sharing the gospel was left to humans in some way, could mean that gaining converts might be an equal blessing to losing converts.  And that by not succeeding and experiencing ever increasing grief over the loss of the world could be a way of joining God in his rejection which was the inevitable manifestation of his loving nature on the cross. The jealous God of the Old Testament, a father who gave his own son to a world that hurt him, the son who was despised and rejected, and the holy spirit with a loss that can’t be told. What better honor could there be than to see everyone you care about choose hell over listening to what you have to say.

Blog Post about Fears

 Hi everyone, this is a blog post that has to do with fears of being a bad person. I think I will just keep it simple at this time and revisit the topic more in the future.  The idea I want to share is that God likes for us to have faith in him, in his son who died for us, and surprisingly, in ourselves as his lovable creatures.  It is okay and good to expect that when life exposes our true intents and all the ways of our hearts, plenty of things will turn out very positive and happy for us and for other people.  It is not a sin to have some faith in yourself and in humanity.  I am not talking about trusting people instead of God for salvation.  But I am saying that when it comes to being scared that you will be found out as a racist, or selfish to the core, or a predator or deviant of some kind, it is much more likely that your whole life will mostly reflect God’s goodness if you put your faith and hope in him.  Depression can fog that up, too, but I just wanted to tell everyone the good news that life doesn’t have to be just a perpetual trap that demonstrates your inferiority and failure.  Even when it seems that is the case, our grief over loss will turn out to be the greater beauty.  So believe what God says and know that it is for you too. God loves you and Jesus did not die for no reason, bad or good or hard to understand.

a great verse that does apply

 No weapon formed against you shall prosper,

And every tongue which rises against you in judgment

You shall condemn.

This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord,

And their righteousness is from Me,”

Says the Lord.

Pete and Re-Pete

 Ok everyone, this post is about redundancies that might actually be original things. What do I mean by that. I mean that the theological secret might be that “Jesus followed Jesus on your behalf.” Like not just that Jesus fulfilled Judaism on your behalf.  Ok and here is another related question.  Did Jesus have saving faith on your behalf? To me that is a tough one. But anyway that is just food for thought.  If you think it means nothing you are wrong. It is a fact that Jesus did the righteousness work for us, and you either take him up on it or you don’t.  But if you care at all you probably will, and if you need proof, God probably will provide it.  Although in the bible when he did that for someone, namely, Thomas, they had already had their chance and missed it. So it was a double concession, not to mention the salvation in the first place.  Well have a nice day, I have another related post after this one.  

Eligibility Theories

Ok everyone this is an idea about what is sometimes called an “atonement theory,” and it has to do with trying to understand the “mechanics” of why the cross secured salvation for humanity.  Or maybe, just those interested. Or maybe, those interested enough.  

So anyway, this is a theory that has to do with the “Father forgive them for they know not what they do” prayer being a key component of salvation and mostly a matter of being simply a “prayer that availeth,” or the most powerful prayer ever, that is also actually answerable by God. Ok, so the bible says that righteousness is a factor when we pray.  “the prayer of a righteous man is effective.” So the idea is that Jesus acquired the righteousness necessary for his prayer to be accepted, and then prayed the most inclusive forgiving prayer possible.  And it was a prayer of forgiveness, with what could be a condition stated as well, that has to do with people “not knowing what they do.”  

 

This theory could correspond to three ideas of atonement: Atonement, Substitutionary Atonement, and Limited Atonement.  But I am not going to define those things, and I think really that could distract from a simpler way of looking at it. Ok basically Jesus pleases God, prays for those who didn’t, and then what is the third thing? I think there is a third thing that might have to do with who isn’t included.  Romans describes it more like people who are blind vs people who can see. Like God has mercy on those whom he has mercy.  But I think here it is the opposite and the blinder people are innocent.  Like the people who now have hurt God as an innocent mistake vs people who do it anyway knowing what they are doing and choosing to remain his enemy.  And the fact that mistakes can be innocent is the new miracle happening in real time at the cross.  So anyway, that is a theology idea that could be helpful, and notice the way things are often in threes.  When you figure that out, the verves start spinning you into the air and you find yourself in a roaring corridor of God’s love, where you see the building of sin that will explode and you must find your way out of it.  But it is only by God’s grace. 

 

Anyway, that is some Protestant theology and people should know that it is in fact true. That does not mean that Martin Luther is the savior, and it actually most means that people don’t save themselves with a prayer.  God saved us with a prayer that has already been prayed, and what can people do but say they hope they are one of the ones who did not know.

 

Ok that is a nice post but the remaining question I genuinely have is whether the father-forgive-them prayer was part of what was necessary to please God or had Jesus already pleased him enough without the prayer and that is why he could pray. I suspect it is actually simultaneous and that is the main miracle and a clue about destiny. People could also say, okay, it's not that he prayed for us, but that he died for us.  But is this prayer not part of his death, and what made his death different from other deaths? I personally suspect it could have to do with this prayer and what is behind it.

 

Another factor: “for they know not what they do-” is that a description or a decree? And what is the timing of the decree.  It is darn interesting, have a nice day everyone.

Ok one more crazy thing.  Does it turn out that only the people God loves hurt him?  And as for the other people, he simply doesn't care? They aren't worth his time or his pain. That has to do with his jealousy in the Old Testament too. Well that is all my thoughts. I really like posts that have a simple theme and point but this is what makes this blog a theology blog instead of just Christian Living, like most of my other posts. Anyway, there is a final point to make which is that some people do understand this stuff.  God already told humanity the truth, and there are ways to find the answers when things do not make sense.

A flesh-made word

 Hi everyone, I just wanted to share a little joke vocabulary word for when people are bad but there's not much of a satanic attack to account for it.  You can say that things were all too human-tanic. Like when the lights come on and there are no demons to be found. Just bad people being bad.  A human-tanic attack. Some of us are a little too familiar with that aren't we. I guess we all are in some way. Well have a great day everyone.

Stages

        I took a theology class a few years ago and there was a question asking what we thought of the concept of phases and stages.  It had to do with whether we believed there were standard or common processes where people went through similar sequences of status and experience during their spiritual development.  And I said something about how concepts of phases were often a good resource of collective wisdom but people need to be able to live their life, too, without having every interaction predicted and seen as generic and labeled.  I didn't say it that well, and I think I missed something more important, which has to do with the progress itself, and the sins along the way that other people try to establish as representative and defining.

     An example that is kind of deep can be seen in the life of Van Gogh, who gave the world an artistic life and works that were accessible to all, enjoyed now by millions, and probably backed supernaturally in a way that people often forget art can be.  People usually look for that kind of supernatural power in religion and ministry, and I think a lot of people trying to do church work feel frustrated if they don't see that kind of spiritual fruit immediately.

   But Van Gogh is a person who had some distinct stages in his life, and there was a time early on that he wanted to be a missionary.  And he did some hard labor and it was said that in that work he earned the nickname "Christ of the Coal mines." Well I don't know exactly what happened, but it just has a certain ring to it like he thought of it himself and was trying to establish a reputation of being some kind of saint. To me, it does come across as a little bit self centered and classically spiritually immature. But even if that is the case, and it might not be, it's still not that bad, and in the long run could serve as a good signature on all his work and proof that there were in fact religious origins for his generous and successful soul. If that hadn't been in his biography as his nickname, some people would be sure to identify him more with things like his suspected case of syphilis.  But anyway, when I hear his story, I am reminded of phases that I have gone through as an evangelical, where I focused too much on other people's salvation at times, or did some of my socializing with ulterior conversion motives, or tried to bring about a forced influence from my life instead of an authentic offering of love and work.  Sometimes people called me on it, but more often, there were mean and false accusations, insults, and rude attempts to make me fail.  Because as much as it was a phase of evangelical Christianity, it was also just a step on a legitimate path to productive spiritual vocation, and I ended up with years of whole-hearted service and good prayer traction with very probable answers from God that have helped millions of people. 

      It's really something to think about, because as much as all humans can be fault-finders sometimes, categories of people do sometimes become known by their mistakes and bad habits, and religious hypocrisy is one of those things that people most don't appreciate.  People like me betray people sometimes, and try to trade in friends for conversion credit.  But by ratio, it is just a phase that we do learn from, and might even help us get to the next level of a more sincere love than would ever happen if we never stumbled in that way.  

    So people can criticize us, and label us with whatever insults they think when they see the pattern of a lot of us making the same mistakes, but the real shame will probably be from the loss of those who never dared to make those mistakes.  I guess they have their own rewards and God's plan for them will be kind as well, with no lapse or shadow of turning, as they say, but it is good to remember that if there are phases on spiritual paths or any path, those awkward stages might pay off with a depth of sainthood that no one would have turned down themselves if they really understood or had the right vision.

mercy, grace, and justice

 hi everyone I have been thinking about justice since I hear it referenced so much in certain contexts, sometimes rightfully and sometimes in offensively wrong fake agenda definitions. But anyway I thought of a way of looking at it that I think would help people who think about it in Christian ways, and that is to think of it as part of a concept trio that includes mercy, grace, and justice. People often describe mercy and grace together and differentiate between the two, or they contrast mercy and justice. But I have idea which is that it might fit better with consistent faith if people think of three types of blessings: justice, where you get what you deserve, mercy, where you get spared what you deserve, and grace, where you get something even though you don’t deserve it. So it is like an idea framework for understanding rightful and life-giving wages. Another concept that would be separate or maybe primary to those things, or motivational behind them could be righteousness or love. That is just a theological way of framing it because I think the concepts have been separated in some understandings and those problems have played out in our society. Some people try to promote some kind of justice without a concept of the mercy and grace that is needed as well, and other people only feel responsible for offering mercy and grace, so they ignore other responsibilities and then try to fake the charity. it is a problem either way and I know some justice people don’t think so but there is a lot of destruction happening in the name of justice where people are pretending they haven’t partaken of some extreme patience and mercy. So anyway, it feels too late for anyone to figure this out but I think it could still help people instead of being viewed as an either/or thing or as pairs that are missing a third concept.