Unconditional Conditional Love

    Well everyone, this post is about my great theological secret that I think could benefit many people. I have already written one blog post about it before. The idea is based on an adaptation of the kind of love I learned about at church a long time ago.  Sometimes people talk about “unconditional love,” which supposedly is love that continues even when people are not in a condition that seems as lovable as usual, or as lovable as possible.  It seems so nice, except for the fact that a lot of times, it becomes more of some kind of “unconditional condescension” instead, because in your heart, you think the person is not actually lovable.  People think that they are just flinging their amazing and priceless love into a void as some heroic act, when really, for them to take that view means they have to ignore great worth that God himself has created.  I became unsatisfied with that hypocrisy early in my life, and have tried a different way of relating to people, which might seem contradictory or even redundant. But I think that really, it is closer to what unconditional love was supposed to be. I think it would be best described as “unconditional conditional love.”  The idea of it is that your choice to extend goodwill and appreciation to people is unconditional, but the love itself is based on actual lovable factors about people that you deliberately search for and easily find if you are a good person yourself.

    People might interrupt here and excitedly say, “oh, like “tough love” where you get to confront people about their faults.”  No, I still mean a kind positive caring effort in thought and feeling and deed, that gives people the benefit of the doubt even if that doubt is reminiscent of total depravity.

    There are all kinds of things to love and even admire about almost anyone. The intellectual effort of it can kind of turn you into a robot if not enough nice people love you back, but I think in the end, it is much more effective and true than insulting people with a love so fake that you have to remind everyone that it is not based on anything whatsoever except for your own decision to ignore Jesus’s command not to throw your pearls to pigs.

   It starts with looking around and questioning church doctrine, and secretly whispering to yourself and to God, “What if these people actually are lovable?” and “What if really I’m not in a zombie movie like the people who disapprove of zombie movies tried to tell me?”

    I myself do not like zombie movies, so that is not exactly my point. My point is that if you think being friends with someone is such a miracle that brought life out of an abyss of pure evil, then you should also be doing other miracles that are more obvious, like making trees walk. And if you’re not, then maybe the miracle is that people would be friends with you.

The real problem with cursing

Ok everyone I am going to phrase this post mostly as questions because I am truly not sure about it.  It has to do with curses and justice.  The thing I am wondering has to do with something Jesus taught people which is to bless others and not to curse them, even if they are our enemies.  And he said to pray for people and love your enemies.  But most people figure out that sometimes you do have to stand up for yourself or others in some way, even just to help keep children safe from each other. There has to be justice in the world, and mercy without it seems meaningless and even dangerous.  Something else Jesus said is that people should not give someone a verbal blessing without backing it up with actions.  Well I am a very verbal person and I like kind words, but the command has more to do with telling people to be blessed but not giving them food if they are hungry.  It becomes hypocritical to say religious things and not help people in need.  So here is the question:  Could the same thing be said about cursing people who harm others but not doing anything to stop them?  Is it also hypocritical to criticize society, or literally say curse words at people, or try to pray a curse for people without taking action as some use of force? I think most army people and cops would see immediately the importance of keeping people safe through justice, but in religious contexts, to say that you should back up curses with actions is pretty crazy.  And yet I believe I am really on to something.  There are curses later in the New Testament, from people like Paul and then an interesting one at the end of Revelation.  And I think the reason they weren’t backed up with obvious violence is because the spiritual power of those making the curses actually is so extreme that the use of force is integrated with the curse.  It is very interesting, and I think for me, the place to start with action is simply to follow Jesus’s command to feed the hungry, and then to remember that there are different types of hunger, and different things that are food, and different ways of intervening when people block food or ruin life.

A verse or a curse?

I sometimes appreciate Catholicism more than my own Evangelical background, and I think some of it comes down to this very interesting and often overlooked verse from the Bible:

Whoever says to the guilty, "You are innocent," will be cursed by peoples and denounced by nations. Proverbs 24:24.  But it will go well with those who convict the guilty, and a rich blessing will come on them. 

I think that in churches and in our country sometimes, there is an important and warranted emphasis of Christ’s forgiveness, who died for people “while we were yet sinners.” But the whole point of his forgiveness is that he had the authority to forgive because of his own righteousness that was so great he had enough to share. I think this issue is related to the difference between Catholic priests and Protestant Pastors, though most people who do what they are supposed to try to achieve some form of complete dependence on God’s mercy and complete obedience to him in gratitude or in expectation.  But I think also people can get carried away with one or the other, or neglectful, and it is reflected in our whole culture, as people get away with stuff that they should not be getting away with. Is the problem rooted in a pronouncement of some kind? I do not know.  I think there could be some scapegoats who aren’t supposed to be the scapegoats, and some people who aren’t getting the punishment they deserve in a society that should and would reflect God’s true and fulfilled mercy if people were really doing and saying what they were supposed to.  I sometimes do not do well when I survey the whole country and culture and try to say a final word about it. But to me this verse might serve that purpose that has not been achieved by many people who were trusted with that responsibility.

OCD in the Bible

    I took a class that was an online certificate program at a seminary program last fall, and when we studied the book of Luke in the Bible, we talked about the gospels being kind of like a corroboration of witnesses. The fact that there is some variation in the reports actually adds credence, and of course the overwhelming agreement is the main verification of the unbelievable claims and events described.  It is very interesting to think about, but there is something else that has to do with that topic when you expand to include the disciples who did not write the gospels, and you look at the case of Doubting Thomas, who in my opinion, may have been mentally ill.  After the crucifixion and resurrection, Thomas famously said that he would not believe Jesus was alive unless he put his hands in Jesus’s wounds.  He told this to the other disciples after they claimed to see the risen Christ, and then a week later, Jesus was with them and told Thomas he could touch his wounds.  You could tell it was on Jesus’s mental to do list, like a social worker. There were other disciples who also had trouble believing it and were going to have to go out into the world and tell people about everything that was happening.  It is crazy to think about and I relate to them as an evangelical who has felt a burden to tell others what I have known even while doubting so much myself.  But I think that even though God has made it clear in the Bible that he likes faith and he likes for people to believe and trust him, sometimes unbelief is more like disbelief, and corroborates the miraculous and truly “unbelievable” nature of what God has done for us.  

    That could be enough to say, but this topic could really still be expanded and I will go ahead and say that I think the Bible can be seen this way, too.  The Bible is true beyond belief, and there are things contained in it that could literally blind people’s eyes if they really read it for what it is.  And just as there can sometimes be more than one interpretation, there can also be different levels of interpretation. People can read it and simply do what it says, or people can read it and actually be looking at the scenes depicted in it through all the ages. I am talking about making eye contact with Bible characters.   And I want to suggest something controversial, and say that even in the face of that kind of miracle, seeing the Bible as completely untrue might be one level of interpretation that isn’t as bad as some people think. I think the possible legitimacy of interpretation like this, which often comes in the form of not appreciating the Levitical Laws or Paul’s letters, has to do with Christ’s death. The Logos, or "the way, the truth, and the life," (John 14:6) died. Nicodemus, who as a Jewish Pharisee was not supposed to touch dead things, took care of Jesus’s dead body. 

    Christianity hinges so much on the resurrection, but the reconciliation of sinners to God happened through the atonement, which happened when God died as a human.  To see the Bible or word of God as dead, irrelevant, or even false could be part of seeing Christ on the cross as the sinner that he wasn’t, and I do not doubt that whole cultures could take that view and be saved.

Comments about Revelation

    Well everyone, you are probably wondering why I have not blogged yet about my recent reading of the book of Revelation from the Bible.  Well it is because I am a little shaken up by it. I skimmed the book of John a few days before, and I felt like that book was almost exactly what Jesus might have written himself, and then a few days later, I read the book of Revelation, written by John who said he was “in the spirit” when he wrote it.  I believe that. I believe it is definitely true.  I can’t remember if I was at the mall when I read it or at the mall right after I read it, but something about being at the mall and thinking about all those scary but amazing things really made me want to not see people get scorched or singed by the lake of fire.  It is definitely not a joke and I am thankful that the worst part has already happened, which is when Christ got the wrath of God heaped on him and defeated death.  That was the sixth seal, that was opened kind of like a game show but out of the seven seals that get opened, that one is the one where the price is right womp womp womp losing horn definitely sounded.  It had to do with death and wrath and a certain number that I won’t mention but is the reason why 777 is a jackpot number.  Then during the seventh seal there was thirty minutes of silence in heaven.  That is interesting and I wonder what was going on or what will someday happen. 

     There is also later a part in revelation where it talks about a Babylonian city of prostitution being destroyed forever and all of God’s people rejoicing over its permanent destruction.  I think it has to do with all cultures of trafficking and abuse and bad movies that are projected into cities that could have been nice places to live. People joke about stuff like that and there is a restaurant called “Babylon” near the hospital where I get my mental illness treatment.  But if you read revelation you will see that you do not want to be part of that problem.  The book’s description about how people who believe in Jesus will endure and prevail and are “called, chosen, and faithful,” is comforting and I found it to have an inclusive feel to it and not as exclusive as I sometimes fear.  One of the highlights in the book is the description of multitudes of people from all tribes and nations gathering around God and saying “Salvation belongs to the Lord,” etc.  There are too many people to count, and I think the way it is phrased leaves a possibility that even with that crowd they could still be representatives for even more people. Also, I think it is interesting because it might mean that we see a storyline that makes us realize that everything good that happened was from God and things were not as much up to us as we would want to take credit for sometimes.  But towards the end there is a mention not just of wanting to have your name in the Book of Life, but other books that have recorded people’s goodness and deeds. It sounds kind of like a stack of books but it really could be a whole library that includes books and stories written by cartoon animals. People might say not to say stuff like that but I think people’s guardian angel animals might have recorded a lot of indisputable interpretations of things that happen, and a merciful and kind perception of people’s lives and suffering. Anyway a key word from the book is forever and ever.  The beast that makes us have to be patient in these times will be punished and tormented forever and ever.  Aside from that, there is also a “second death” in the lake of fire for people like bad Babylon entities. I think there is kind of a possibility of total destruction for some people instead of eternal torment, which might help anyone who is confused by warnings about hell that make it sound like God has decided to torture us forever if we make even one mistake.  Some theology does come across that way sometimes.

    Anyway this new information about the Book of Life and other books might change some of my perceptions about Judgement Day and make me expect more poetic justice and a literary scene as opposed to a huge network of courtroom trials and a TV show that mixes the Price is Right with the People’s court, Dante’s Inferno, and Bosch’s Judgement Day paintings. It honestly could be as simple as going to a nice sunlit room in a calm library, reading a children’s book about breakfast food, and remembering that you did in fact invite your sad friend to the diner that time, or that you didn’t steal anything else from the mall after learning your lesson from the little stone cross pendant incident in middle school.

This is my best theory everyone

     Ok everyone, I mentioned the ten commandments in that other post, and 

I just want to say that several years ago, I noticed something about the phrasing of the commandments that I think is very interesting. People say sometimes that the commandment that says “honor your father and mother and you will live a long life,” or something like that, is the only commandment that has a promise.  But I actually have this other suspicion, which is that since the commandments are phrased like “You shall not steal,” and “you shall not lie,” then really they are all promises.  I think they might be an announcement of God’s promise that eventually his people will no longer sin and suffer.  Kind of like “someday, children, you will no longer covet.” Has anyone ever heard that before?  I really can’t believe that no one else would notice that.  And I think there could also be a Presbyterian interpretation that is even broader, which has to do with the word “eventually” or “someday” being a wrong word for me to say, and that the promise really is “You will not steal,” based on the total forgiveness provided by Christ, even in storyline format where the happy ending, or really the happy neverending, is the pre-destiny of the truly innocent.

ownership as stewardship

     I feel like responding to some teaching I have heard where people remind everyone that God owns everything.  The Bible says he owns the cattle on a thousand hills.  I think it is true.  “The earth is the Lord’s and everything in it.”  People say that we are just “stewards” and caretakers. But I just want to say that on some level he also gives gifts that belong to us in some way and people who try to pretend this is not the case sometimes can’t really live by that standard rationally.  The concept of possession is established early on in the Bible in the ten commandments that say do not steal.  Later on, when the church was getting started, people were encouraged to share everything, but this expression of love still depends on people having a concept that something was voluntarily given up when it might have been otherwise. Another interesting instruction that Jesus told someone was “sell everything you have and give to the poor.”  Interestingly, he did not say give all your stuff to the poor, but sell it and give to the poor. To me, this means that we should give homeless people cash sometimes instead of food. 

     Anyway, I feel like saying this opinion because giving is one of my spiritual gifts, and I think that for giving to work, people at some time have to acknowledge having something, owning it, accepting it, acquiring it, and any other form of possession.  And I think you can be more generous and more grateful when you face the reality that things can be yours or not yours. And it becomes a little bit nonsensical to really try to believe that the pair of shoes you wear every day isn’t really yours but either a loan or Jesus Christ’s shoes that he just happens to not be wearing and doesn’t intend to wear at any time throughout eternity.

       Anyway, I usually hear that teaching a lot from people who have a lot. They get what they need and then say it is God’s. But it is confusing when you are missing basic needs because of injustice and people say even what you have isn’t yours. And you know they are telling you that because if it were up to them you would not have that either.