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.