My wife recently attended a talk regarding anger management (see handouts). She said that the main takeaways were to prevent things from escalating and to talk things through. For example, putting into words why you're angry can help you cope with the anger better and also give others greater insight into why you're mad (and also make it less scary). I know one of the things that triggers my anger is when I have something in my head as going one way (particularly in terms of getting things done or having time for myself) and then things turning out completely different. In the Screwtape Letters, C.S. Lewis (via Screwtape) observes:
Men are not angered by mere misfortune but by misfortune conceived as injury. And the sense of injury depends on the feeling that a legitimate claim has been denied. The more claims on life, therefore, that your patient can be induced to make, the more often he will feel injured and, as a result, ill-tempered. Now you will have noticed that nothing throws him into a passion so easily as to find a tract of time which he reckoned on having at this own disposal unexpectedly taken from him ... Now he is not yet so uncharitable or slothful that these small demands on his courtesy are in themselves too much for it. They anger him because he regards his time as his own and feels that it is being stolen.
This is definitely my #1 anger trigger. There are so many things I want to do and seemingly so little time to get it all done.
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Friday, April 28, 2006
Life's Journey
I was randomly looking at other blogs and I came across one that I really liked. It's called "Life's Journey" and it's written by a 26-year-old woman in Minnesota named Emily (who I don't know). I especially liked her post called "The Day I Died". It says:
I died the other day. No, it wasn't suddenly. It had been happening slowly. It started the day I stopped dreaming. You see, my dreams were too big and I was inadequate. Or so I thought and so I had been told. "You're too shy. You're too sick. You're too depressed. You're too broke..."
So I gave up those dreams. And I stopped dreaming altogether. That's the day I died. The fire that burned so brightly through sickness and despair was snuffed out. After all, isn't it time I started living a little more "realistically?"
But then I wonder, in deeming my dreams too big, am I making my God too small? I mean, "realistically" I couldn't have done half the things that I've done in my life. That's the miracle of God. He helps us do things that we couldn't possibly do on our own...
I died the other day. But I know a God that can bring dead things back to life and accomplish the impossible. Even dreams that are too big for lives that are completely inadequate.
Emily, whoever she is, is a great writer.
I died the other day. No, it wasn't suddenly. It had been happening slowly. It started the day I stopped dreaming. You see, my dreams were too big and I was inadequate. Or so I thought and so I had been told. "You're too shy. You're too sick. You're too depressed. You're too broke..."
So I gave up those dreams. And I stopped dreaming altogether. That's the day I died. The fire that burned so brightly through sickness and despair was snuffed out. After all, isn't it time I started living a little more "realistically?"
But then I wonder, in deeming my dreams too big, am I making my God too small? I mean, "realistically" I couldn't have done half the things that I've done in my life. That's the miracle of God. He helps us do things that we couldn't possibly do on our own...
I died the other day. But I know a God that can bring dead things back to life and accomplish the impossible. Even dreams that are too big for lives that are completely inadequate.
Emily, whoever she is, is a great writer.
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Sexless smooching
While on the topic of depression, there's a quick blurb in Men's Health magazine about the importance of intimacy with your spouse. Specifically:
A new survey shows that couples who don't kiss frequently in nonsexual situations are eight times more likely to feel stressed or depressed compared with frequent smoochers. The survey of 3,300 people for the Berman Center found a strong correlation between relationship intimacy and the frequency of nonsexual kissing and cuddling ... Snuggling, says [therapist Laura Berman Ph.D.], may trigger the release of oxytocin, "the chemical of attachment," which leads to a feeling of closeness.
Just one more reason to kiss my wife as often as possible. =)
A new survey shows that couples who don't kiss frequently in nonsexual situations are eight times more likely to feel stressed or depressed compared with frequent smoochers. The survey of 3,300 people for the Berman Center found a strong correlation between relationship intimacy and the frequency of nonsexual kissing and cuddling ... Snuggling, says [therapist Laura Berman Ph.D.], may trigger the release of oxytocin, "the chemical of attachment," which leads to a feeling of closeness.
Just one more reason to kiss my wife as often as possible. =)
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Depression and faith
I just discovered a Web site that seems pretty intersting: explorefaith.org. It's tagline is "Spiritual guidance for anyone seeking a path to God". I think I qualify. Anyway, there is an article on the site called "How could depression lead to a richer spiritual life?" by Parker J. Palmer, Ph.D. The response is included below in its entirety:
I can answer this question only after the fact, because in the midst of severe clinical depression I have never felt anything redeeming about it, spiritually or otherwise. But when I emerge back into life, several things become clear. One is that the darkness did not kill me, which makes alldarknesses more bearable—and since darkness is an inevitable part of the cycle of spiritual life (as it is in the cycle of natural life) this is valuable knowledge. Two, depression has taught me that there is something in me far deeper and stronger and truer than my ego, my emotions, my intellect, or my will. All of these faculties have failed me in depression, and if they were all I had, I do not believe I would still be here to talk about the experience. Deeper down there is a soul, or true self, or "that of God in every person" that helps explain (for me, at least) where the real power of life resides. Three, the experience of emerging from a living hell makes the rest of one's life more precious, no matter how "ordinary" it may be. To know that life is a gift, and to be grateful for that gift, are keys to a spiritual life, keys that one is handed as depression yields to new life.
I was sick last week and wasn't able to eat much. At the tale end of the sickness, my wife and I went out for dinner and I had a turkey burger. The first bite was heavenly - but only because I had been eating white bread and white rice exclusively the prior four days. Sometimes you just take good things for granted and only truly value them once they've been taken away.
I can answer this question only after the fact, because in the midst of severe clinical depression I have never felt anything redeeming about it, spiritually or otherwise. But when I emerge back into life, several things become clear. One is that the darkness did not kill me, which makes alldarknesses more bearable—and since darkness is an inevitable part of the cycle of spiritual life (as it is in the cycle of natural life) this is valuable knowledge. Two, depression has taught me that there is something in me far deeper and stronger and truer than my ego, my emotions, my intellect, or my will. All of these faculties have failed me in depression, and if they were all I had, I do not believe I would still be here to talk about the experience. Deeper down there is a soul, or true self, or "that of God in every person" that helps explain (for me, at least) where the real power of life resides. Three, the experience of emerging from a living hell makes the rest of one's life more precious, no matter how "ordinary" it may be. To know that life is a gift, and to be grateful for that gift, are keys to a spiritual life, keys that one is handed as depression yields to new life.
I was sick last week and wasn't able to eat much. At the tale end of the sickness, my wife and I went out for dinner and I had a turkey burger. The first bite was heavenly - but only because I had been eating white bread and white rice exclusively the prior four days. Sometimes you just take good things for granted and only truly value them once they've been taken away.
My wife rocks
This afternoon, my wife sent me a quick email entitled "you rock" saying "I just want to tell you how much I love you and how much I enjoy sharing my life with you. You rock!". Today was kind of crazy at work but that simple statement changed my whole day. It's funny ... there have been so many times that I want to tell my wife how I truly feel about her but only the words "I love you" come out. There's so much more to it than that but I simply can't put it into words. It's simply an amazing feeling to know you've found your soul mate, someone you can share your ups and down with and rely on no matter what.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Gospel of Judas
There has been a lot of coverage recently regarding the newly found Gospel of Judas (here is a link to one such article). For centuries, Judas has been characterized as a traitor. But now there appears to be evidence that Judas might have been fulfilling a request from Jesus. It's hard to know what to believe. The Gospel of Judas and Judas being a traitor are not necessarily incompatible. If you were Judas or an associate of Judas and he really did betray Jesus, you might still feel guilty about the betrayal and propagate a story that you were simply "acting under orders" - the excuse certainly get used for all forms of atrocities. On the other hand, perhaps Judas has been misunderstood all these years. Who knows.
Reading about the Gospel of Judas reminded me of a larger topic from my religion course - whether the Bible is literally the word of God. My opinion is that it's not. In one of our lectures, the professor pointed out that “the New Testament … took centuries to take its final form. Many writings were not included because at some point or other decisions were made what was orthodox (true) and what was heretical (not true).” When I hear things like that, it immediately makes me think of the fact that the winners write the history books. Many American history books (especially those used in K-12 settings) either gloss over or massively sugar-coat the injustices against Native Americans. But the reality is that the “white man” was the victor and propagated a favorable (or at least more favorable) version of those events. Similarly, with the New Testament, practical considerations such as a patriarchal culture and Roman/Greek philosophy can’t help but to have compromised the New Testament in some way. I understand the argument that some make that the authoring and editorial process was guided by God (specifically the Holy Spirit) and, therefore, the New Testament is the word of God. But I have a lot of trouble buying that argument. I can certainly accept that many people were moved by the Holy Spirit to record their stories in written form and to share their stories with others. But if you buy into the concept of free will (and “free will [being] so important that even God must respect it”), I don’t see how God could have guided every sub-action of the process. If God did, it would imply that the human participants wouldn’t be permitted to choose between good (ensuring the absolute accuracy and integrity of the document) and evil (compromising the document given external forces). And if free will was active in any part of the authoring process, there must be at least one word in the entire New Testament that isn’t truly the word of God. I’m not saying any of this to “attack” the New Testament. I’m sure it’s a very valuable document and is probably accurate in many accounts. But I just can’t accept – at least not right now – that the document is the literal word of God.
Islam shares a similar opinion regarding the Bible. They believe the Bible is divinely inspired but God's true message was corrupted by man over time. Muslims believe that message was restored through a "direct transmission" to Muhammad and is recorded in the Koran. By the same logic as before, I can't buy into that argument. In The World's Religions, it says that “the words that Muhammad exclaimed in [his] often trance-like states were memorized by his followers and recorded on bones, bark, leaves, and scraps of parchment, with God preserving their accuracy throughout.” But I can’t buy into this argument (that God preserved the accuracy throughout) any more for Islam (and the Koran) than I do with Christianity (and the Bible). Free will must have been active and compromised the process somewhere along the way. With all that said, I can accept that the Koran is divinely inspired and that its existence and beauty is a miracle (given Muhammad’s level of education, etc).
The thing that all of this gets me thinking about is whether any of these faiths is really “complete”. For example, why would God create man and then offer revelations to different people / prophets around the world (“to every people we have sent a messenger”)? One explanation is that God wants man to search out the “truth” and conduct that search of their own free will. But that begs the question of why such a search for truth (religion) has led to so much turmoil and violence in the world. Perhaps it’s all a test of man. Perhaps God gave different pieces of the puzzle to different faiths but left enough overlap and confusion that it wouldn’t be immediately clear which pieces were which (or even what is or isn’t a piece in the first place) and how the pieces fit together. Perhaps that man’s greatest test – finding a single truth among all the revelations (old and new), being selfless and God-seeking enough to set aside some of our prior beliefs, and come together as a people (all of us) in that new found truth.
Reading about the Gospel of Judas reminded me of a larger topic from my religion course - whether the Bible is literally the word of God. My opinion is that it's not. In one of our lectures, the professor pointed out that “the New Testament … took centuries to take its final form. Many writings were not included because at some point or other decisions were made what was orthodox (true) and what was heretical (not true).” When I hear things like that, it immediately makes me think of the fact that the winners write the history books. Many American history books (especially those used in K-12 settings) either gloss over or massively sugar-coat the injustices against Native Americans. But the reality is that the “white man” was the victor and propagated a favorable (or at least more favorable) version of those events. Similarly, with the New Testament, practical considerations such as a patriarchal culture and Roman/Greek philosophy can’t help but to have compromised the New Testament in some way. I understand the argument that some make that the authoring and editorial process was guided by God (specifically the Holy Spirit) and, therefore, the New Testament is the word of God. But I have a lot of trouble buying that argument. I can certainly accept that many people were moved by the Holy Spirit to record their stories in written form and to share their stories with others. But if you buy into the concept of free will (and “free will [being] so important that even God must respect it”), I don’t see how God could have guided every sub-action of the process. If God did, it would imply that the human participants wouldn’t be permitted to choose between good (ensuring the absolute accuracy and integrity of the document) and evil (compromising the document given external forces). And if free will was active in any part of the authoring process, there must be at least one word in the entire New Testament that isn’t truly the word of God. I’m not saying any of this to “attack” the New Testament. I’m sure it’s a very valuable document and is probably accurate in many accounts. But I just can’t accept – at least not right now – that the document is the literal word of God.
Islam shares a similar opinion regarding the Bible. They believe the Bible is divinely inspired but God's true message was corrupted by man over time. Muslims believe that message was restored through a "direct transmission" to Muhammad and is recorded in the Koran. By the same logic as before, I can't buy into that argument. In The World's Religions, it says that “the words that Muhammad exclaimed in [his] often trance-like states were memorized by his followers and recorded on bones, bark, leaves, and scraps of parchment, with God preserving their accuracy throughout.” But I can’t buy into this argument (that God preserved the accuracy throughout) any more for Islam (and the Koran) than I do with Christianity (and the Bible). Free will must have been active and compromised the process somewhere along the way. With all that said, I can accept that the Koran is divinely inspired and that its existence and beauty is a miracle (given Muhammad’s level of education, etc).
The thing that all of this gets me thinking about is whether any of these faiths is really “complete”. For example, why would God create man and then offer revelations to different people / prophets around the world (“to every people we have sent a messenger”)? One explanation is that God wants man to search out the “truth” and conduct that search of their own free will. But that begs the question of why such a search for truth (religion) has led to so much turmoil and violence in the world. Perhaps it’s all a test of man. Perhaps God gave different pieces of the puzzle to different faiths but left enough overlap and confusion that it wouldn’t be immediately clear which pieces were which (or even what is or isn’t a piece in the first place) and how the pieces fit together. Perhaps that man’s greatest test – finding a single truth among all the revelations (old and new), being selfless and God-seeking enough to set aside some of our prior beliefs, and come together as a people (all of us) in that new found truth.
Monday, April 24, 2006
An Inconvenient Truth
I just read two entries on the TerraBlog regarding Al Gore and his fight against global warming (entry #1, entry #2). Gore is coming out with a movie on May 24 called "An Inconvenient Truth" (see web site and trailer). If possible, I'm going to try to see the movie on opening day. Similar to The Passion of Christ, they're trying to get as many people as possible to go on opening weekend to generate buzz for the film (and topic of global warming). I really hope this film does well. There are some really scary implications if we don't start doing something about this problem. I usually don't endorse films but, if possible, please go see the movie too when it first comes out.
Sunday, April 23, 2006
Semantics
I've commented a number of times in this blog regarding pride. There was a set of articles in InTouch magazine regarding the importance of humility (articles here). Probably the most interesting passage from one of the articles is1 Peter 5:6-7:
Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time: Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.
Now there is a lot of richness in the English language for a reason and the words "pride" and "proud" can mean a number of things. So I think it's helpful to be as precise as possible regarding what I think my issue is. The Random House Dictionary defines "pride" and "proud" as:
Pride: 1. too high an opinion of one's importance or superiority; 2. dignified self-respect; 3. gratification arising from one's accomplishments or possessions; 4. arrogant behavior; 5. something that a person is proud of; 6. a company of lions
Proud: 1. thinking well of oneself becuase of one's accomplishments, possessions, etc; 2. feeling honored, as by a distinction conferred on one; 3. governed in one's words or actions by self-respect; 4. inclined to excessive self-esteem; 5. promoting a feeling of pride; 6. stately or majestic [syn. 1. self-satisfied; 4. haughty, overbearing, vain]
While we have the dictionary out, let's look up some more words that may be relevant to this discussion (in alphabetical order) ...
Arrogant: 2. making unwarrantable claims to superior importance; 2. haughty or overbearing
Conceit: 1. an exaggerated estimate of one's own ability, importance, etc [syn. 1. egotism, self-esteem, vanity]
Condescend: 1. to lower oneself to do something; 2. to behave as if one is conscious of descending from a superior position
Confidence: 1. full trust; 2. self-reliance, assurance, or boldness; 3. a confidential communication
Dignity: 1. formal, grave, or noble bearing, conduct, or speech; 2. nobility or elevation of character; 3. elevated rank, office, station, etc.
Egocentric: regarding the self as the center of all worldly things
Egoism: 1. the habit of valuing everything only in reference to one's personal interest; 2. conceit or self-esteem
Egotism: 1. excessive and objectionable reference to oneself, in conversation or writing; 2. self-conceit or boastfulness
Egotrip: an act undertaken primarily to satisfy one's vanity or self-image
Pompous: 1. making an ostentatious display of dignity or importance; 2. ostentatiously lofty or high-flown
Self-important: having or showing too high an opinion of one's own worth
Self-respect: proper esteem for the dignity of one's own character
Self-righeous: smugly confident of one's own righteousness
Smug: contentedly confident of one's ability or correctness [syn. complacent, conceited, self-satisfied]
Superior: 1. above the average in excellence or intelligence; 2. of higher grade or quality; 3. greater in quantity or amount; 4. higher in rank or position; 5. showing a consciousness of superiority to others; 6. not yielding or susceptiable: to be superior to temptation
Vain: 1. excessively proud or concerned about one's own appearance or achievements; 2. unsuccessful or futile; 3. without real value or worth
That's quite a list of words - most of which I don't think apply. So, let's be precise. I think my issue is primarily feeling superior and secondarily being egocentric. In the first InTouch article, it says that some people "give the appearance of humility through [their] outward actions while inwardly harboring thoughts of spiritual superiority toward others." That's my issue precisely - acting humble on the outside but feeling superior to others on the inside. That's then combined with egocentrism in that I feel like I'm the only one grappling with certain issues - or at least grappling with them at a certain level or in the "right" way. Combine these two things and it's no surprise why I'm reluctant to ask for help or to pray. On some level, I feel like I'm above it all (even assistance from God). This is all changing a bit but it's going to be a long, long road.
Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time: Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.
Now there is a lot of richness in the English language for a reason and the words "pride" and "proud" can mean a number of things. So I think it's helpful to be as precise as possible regarding what I think my issue is. The Random House Dictionary defines "pride" and "proud" as:
Pride: 1. too high an opinion of one's importance or superiority; 2. dignified self-respect; 3. gratification arising from one's accomplishments or possessions; 4. arrogant behavior; 5. something that a person is proud of; 6. a company of lions
Proud: 1. thinking well of oneself becuase of one's accomplishments, possessions, etc; 2. feeling honored, as by a distinction conferred on one; 3. governed in one's words or actions by self-respect; 4. inclined to excessive self-esteem; 5. promoting a feeling of pride; 6. stately or majestic [syn. 1. self-satisfied; 4. haughty, overbearing, vain]
While we have the dictionary out, let's look up some more words that may be relevant to this discussion (in alphabetical order) ...
Arrogant: 2. making unwarrantable claims to superior importance; 2. haughty or overbearing
Conceit: 1. an exaggerated estimate of one's own ability, importance, etc [syn. 1. egotism, self-esteem, vanity]
Condescend: 1. to lower oneself to do something; 2. to behave as if one is conscious of descending from a superior position
Confidence: 1. full trust; 2. self-reliance, assurance, or boldness; 3. a confidential communication
Dignity: 1. formal, grave, or noble bearing, conduct, or speech; 2. nobility or elevation of character; 3. elevated rank, office, station, etc.
Egocentric: regarding the self as the center of all worldly things
Egoism: 1. the habit of valuing everything only in reference to one's personal interest; 2. conceit or self-esteem
Egotism: 1. excessive and objectionable reference to oneself, in conversation or writing; 2. self-conceit or boastfulness
Egotrip: an act undertaken primarily to satisfy one's vanity or self-image
Pompous: 1. making an ostentatious display of dignity or importance; 2. ostentatiously lofty or high-flown
Self-important: having or showing too high an opinion of one's own worth
Self-respect: proper esteem for the dignity of one's own character
Self-righeous: smugly confident of one's own righteousness
Smug: contentedly confident of one's ability or correctness [syn. complacent, conceited, self-satisfied]
Superior: 1. above the average in excellence or intelligence; 2. of higher grade or quality; 3. greater in quantity or amount; 4. higher in rank or position; 5. showing a consciousness of superiority to others; 6. not yielding or susceptiable: to be superior to temptation
Vain: 1. excessively proud or concerned about one's own appearance or achievements; 2. unsuccessful or futile; 3. without real value or worth
That's quite a list of words - most of which I don't think apply. So, let's be precise. I think my issue is primarily feeling superior and secondarily being egocentric. In the first InTouch article, it says that some people "give the appearance of humility through [their] outward actions while inwardly harboring thoughts of spiritual superiority toward others." That's my issue precisely - acting humble on the outside but feeling superior to others on the inside. That's then combined with egocentrism in that I feel like I'm the only one grappling with certain issues - or at least grappling with them at a certain level or in the "right" way. Combine these two things and it's no surprise why I'm reluctant to ask for help or to pray. On some level, I feel like I'm above it all (even assistance from God). This is all changing a bit but it's going to be a long, long road.
Cosmic religion
Yesterday was Earth Day 2006. I didn't even realize it was Earth Day until I saw Google's logo (archived here). That lead me to look at the Earth Day Network web site and I found an interesting document regarding the inter-relationship between religion and the environment (archived here). That made me think about some of the early religions I studied in my religion course. Specifically, cosmic religion came to mind. In the lecture, the professor wrote:
It finds and expresses sacred meaning in aspects of nature and human life - seasons, sacred rocks or trees, the social order, birth and death - without linking them to historical personalities or written documents as do founder-religions. This was a religion that was closely observant of the natural world and this formed a strong belief in "animism". Animism, or belief that everything in nature - stones, trees, mountains, lakes, as well as human beings - has a soul or spirit. Indeed, the belief that nature is alive with spirits that have feelings and can be communicated with is one of the most common to human religious experience ... This world - here and now - is fundamentally sacred, and everything is alive with spirit ... Indigenous spirituality is a lifeway, a particular approach to all of life. It is not a separate experience, like meditating in the morning or going to church on Sunday. Rather, spirituality pervades all moments, from reverence in gathering clay to make a pot, to respect within tribal council meetings.
I especially like a practice of the archaic hunters in which they prayed for the souls of the animals they were about to kill for food.
It is necessary to prepare spiritually for a great hunt. There were ceremonies in which the hunters prayed to the spirits of the animals asking their permission to kill them and letting these animals know that they were needed for the hunters to survive. To take the animal requires in some sense the consent of the animal or that of its Divine masters, due propitiation for the wrong done to it, and proper magic to make anything happen at all.
This type of respect for animals and other living things largely does not exist in society now. I’m not advocating that we undo the advances of agriculture and food production but a little respect for the planet would go a long way. I know my eating choices would probably change a lot if I prayed at each meal for the spirits of the animals (and plants) that I was consuming.
It finds and expresses sacred meaning in aspects of nature and human life - seasons, sacred rocks or trees, the social order, birth and death - without linking them to historical personalities or written documents as do founder-religions. This was a religion that was closely observant of the natural world and this formed a strong belief in "animism". Animism, or belief that everything in nature - stones, trees, mountains, lakes, as well as human beings - has a soul or spirit. Indeed, the belief that nature is alive with spirits that have feelings and can be communicated with is one of the most common to human religious experience ... This world - here and now - is fundamentally sacred, and everything is alive with spirit ... Indigenous spirituality is a lifeway, a particular approach to all of life. It is not a separate experience, like meditating in the morning or going to church on Sunday. Rather, spirituality pervades all moments, from reverence in gathering clay to make a pot, to respect within tribal council meetings.
I especially like a practice of the archaic hunters in which they prayed for the souls of the animals they were about to kill for food.
It is necessary to prepare spiritually for a great hunt. There were ceremonies in which the hunters prayed to the spirits of the animals asking their permission to kill them and letting these animals know that they were needed for the hunters to survive. To take the animal requires in some sense the consent of the animal or that of its Divine masters, due propitiation for the wrong done to it, and proper magic to make anything happen at all.
This type of respect for animals and other living things largely does not exist in society now. I’m not advocating that we undo the advances of agriculture and food production but a little respect for the planet would go a long way. I know my eating choices would probably change a lot if I prayed at each meal for the spirits of the animals (and plants) that I was consuming.
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Noah's Ark
I was talking to my mom this morning and she told me about an experience I had when I was JD's age. She enrolled me in a preschool at a local church. In addition to play, stories from the Bible were introduced and discussed. One of the stories was that of Noah's Ark. Apparently it made sense to me why people were being killed for being wicked but I questioned why the animals and other living creatures (who had done nothing wrong) had to suffer as well. It's an interesting question.
In Genesis 6:5-7, it says "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenth me that I have made them." Clearly man (aside from Noah) didn't have any redeeming qualities but what about the animals? Again, there's no mention of them being wicked or that "every imagination of the thoughts of their heart[s] was only evil continually." In Genesis 1:24-25, it says "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the eart after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good." So the animals are made "after his kind" and "God saw that it was good". Still not clear why the animals had to suffer for man's sins.
In Genesis 1:26, it says "let [man] have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepth upon the earth." If man has dominion over animals and over all the earth and man needed to go, perhaps the animals and other living creatures would be irrelevant without man. In military terms, perhaps they would be "acceptable collateral damage" of the mission (flood) to wipe out man (except Noah and his family). Perhaps that's the answer. If so, I don't like it. I believe that animals are God's creatures too and they have souls and go to heaven when they die.
In a Purpose-Driven Life, the author says Earth is a temporary home and that God doesn't want us to get too attached to it. Perhaps the animals' reunion with God was simply accelerated by the flood. Perhaps it was actually a gift in disguise. Not sure, but I like that explanation better than any other one I can come up with. If you can shed some light on this, please let me know.
The thing I find the most interesting about this is that I read these passages in Genesis the other day and this question didn't even occur to me. In Matthew 18:3, it says "Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Perhaps I had a better chance of finding God when I was four (when I poised this question) than I do now. For more on that topic, see this article from InTouch magazine.
In Genesis 6:5-7, it says "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenth me that I have made them." Clearly man (aside from Noah) didn't have any redeeming qualities but what about the animals? Again, there's no mention of them being wicked or that "every imagination of the thoughts of their heart[s] was only evil continually." In Genesis 1:24-25, it says "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the eart after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good." So the animals are made "after his kind" and "God saw that it was good". Still not clear why the animals had to suffer for man's sins.
In Genesis 1:26, it says "let [man] have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepth upon the earth." If man has dominion over animals and over all the earth and man needed to go, perhaps the animals and other living creatures would be irrelevant without man. In military terms, perhaps they would be "acceptable collateral damage" of the mission (flood) to wipe out man (except Noah and his family). Perhaps that's the answer. If so, I don't like it. I believe that animals are God's creatures too and they have souls and go to heaven when they die.
In a Purpose-Driven Life, the author says Earth is a temporary home and that God doesn't want us to get too attached to it. Perhaps the animals' reunion with God was simply accelerated by the flood. Perhaps it was actually a gift in disguise. Not sure, but I like that explanation better than any other one I can come up with. If you can shed some light on this, please let me know.
The thing I find the most interesting about this is that I read these passages in Genesis the other day and this question didn't even occur to me. In Matthew 18:3, it says "Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Perhaps I had a better chance of finding God when I was four (when I poised this question) than I do now. For more on that topic, see this article from InTouch magazine.
Parental support
My mom sent me two copies of InTouch magazine along with the following note. I thought she had some pretty insightful things to say so I decided to post her note (with her permission).
You may or may not find some of this information helpful on your spiritual quest. One of the reasons I support this ministry is because their leader says not to believe anything he says but to read the Bible to see if it is true for yourself.
You did pray as a young child. One day you asked me how do you pray. I told you simply to not be afraid because God knows the secrets of your heart and your inner most thoughts already. There is nothing you can hide. You must trust. This is difficult because there is always the fear of God asking you to do something or give something up that you don't want to do. However God has infinite patience and will keep calling you to seek as long as there is any hope you will listen. It is harder for those who he has gifted with a brilliant mind but God knows if those gifts are used as he intended then much good can result.
For my forbearers who fished the open ocean, there were trusting because each day they were confronted with their vulnerability. I used to ask them all kinds of questions when I was a child to which they had no answers. No answers to those questions to one struggling to believe and have faith because they simply accepted what to them was totally obvious.
Keep seeking. You will find answers and a lot more questions.
Yes, I must keep seeking. For now, I'm left with more questions than answers.
You may or may not find some of this information helpful on your spiritual quest. One of the reasons I support this ministry is because their leader says not to believe anything he says but to read the Bible to see if it is true for yourself.
You did pray as a young child. One day you asked me how do you pray. I told you simply to not be afraid because God knows the secrets of your heart and your inner most thoughts already. There is nothing you can hide. You must trust. This is difficult because there is always the fear of God asking you to do something or give something up that you don't want to do. However God has infinite patience and will keep calling you to seek as long as there is any hope you will listen. It is harder for those who he has gifted with a brilliant mind but God knows if those gifts are used as he intended then much good can result.
For my forbearers who fished the open ocean, there were trusting because each day they were confronted with their vulnerability. I used to ask them all kinds of questions when I was a child to which they had no answers. No answers to those questions to one struggling to believe and have faith because they simply accepted what to them was totally obvious.
Keep seeking. You will find answers and a lot more questions.
Yes, I must keep seeking. For now, I'm left with more questions than answers.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Our deepest fear
A friend of mine just started working at AK Designs. While looking through their web site, I found this quote on their vision page:
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.
Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.
It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.
We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous?
Actually, who are you not to be?
- Nelson Mandela (orig. quote Marianne Williamson)
It's funny. Sometimes you find inspiration where you least expect it.
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.
Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.
It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.
We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous?
Actually, who are you not to be?
- Nelson Mandela (orig. quote Marianne Williamson)
It's funny. Sometimes you find inspiration where you least expect it.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
Cheasters
Today is Easter and I feel obliged to blog about it. There were two interesting articles in the Salt Lake Tribune this morning. One article was about Christians who only attend church on Christmas and Easter. Some churches see two to three times as many attendees on these two days than on a regular Sunday. There are a variety of nicknames for these folks - Cheasters, C&E Christians, and CEOs (Christmas & Easter Only). At the other extreme, there was an article about a group of people who carry a 50-pound cross 21 miles to remind themselves of the suffering that Christ endured for humanity. As one walker puts it, "Everybody is different for what they get out of it. Personally, it's a feeling of humbleness ... It's a lot of pain, also, on your feet and we realize what Christ did for us is so much more." If and when I decide what I'm doing with religion, I suspect I'll be somewhere between these two extremes, but I'm not sure what side of center.
As an aside, my wife's mother did an organ performance at today's church service. I wonder what it's like to be as good at something as she is at the organ.
As an aside, my wife's mother did an organ performance at today's church service. I wonder what it's like to be as good at something as she is at the organ.
Saturday, April 15, 2006
Dawn Treader
About a year ago, my therapist recommended that I read the Voyage of the Dawn Treader by C.S. Lewis. It's part of the Chronicles of Narnia series. I was visiting my sister-in-law SG's library today and I saw some of the other Narnia books on the shelf - which reminded me of this book and one passage in particular. In the book, Eustace (an annoying little boy) gets turned into a dragon. The experience gives him a better appreciation for his friends and for the importance of being nice to them. After Eustace becomes a boy again, he tells Edmund (one of his friends) about his transformation from dragon back to boy. Note: It's a lengthy passage so I created a seperate page rather than post the text here.
Aside from the obvious Biblical allusions (which permeate all of the Narnia books), the thing I found significant about this passage is that as part of our personal transformations, we must strip away multiple layers of imperfections. Most of the time, we think we've made a lot of progress and then discover that we didn't tear deep enough. On some level, we probably know we should go deeper but it's too painful so we just scratch the surface. Genuine transformation, however, requires the courage to go "right to [the] heart" and have "it hurt worse than anything [you've] ever felt". Kind of reminds me of Wilber and his opinions regarding transformation.
Aside from the obvious Biblical allusions (which permeate all of the Narnia books), the thing I found significant about this passage is that as part of our personal transformations, we must strip away multiple layers of imperfections. Most of the time, we think we've made a lot of progress and then discover that we didn't tear deep enough. On some level, we probably know we should go deeper but it's too painful so we just scratch the surface. Genuine transformation, however, requires the courage to go "right to [the] heart" and have "it hurt worse than anything [you've] ever felt". Kind of reminds me of Wilber and his opinions regarding transformation.
Price of children
A co-worker of mine forwarded this email to me. It quotes a government study saying that the cost of raising a child from birth to 18 is $160,140 for a middle income family - not including college expenses. The rest of the email goes on to describe all the great things that you get for that $160,140 per child. One interesting excerpt is:
In the eyes of a child, you rank right up there under God. You have all the power to heal a boo-boo, scare away the monsters under the bed, patch a broken heart, police a slumber party, ground them forever, and love them without limits.
Especially with little kids, it is pretty amazing how a hug and kiss can make so many things right for them - whether it's a bump on the head or a broken toy. It won't last forever, but for now, I guess I really am right up there under God for them. Then one day, as GC once told me, the kids will discover that I'm not perfect and will decide that I don't really know anything.
In the eyes of a child, you rank right up there under God. You have all the power to heal a boo-boo, scare away the monsters under the bed, patch a broken heart, police a slumber party, ground them forever, and love them without limits.
Especially with little kids, it is pretty amazing how a hug and kiss can make so many things right for them - whether it's a bump on the head or a broken toy. It won't last forever, but for now, I guess I really am right up there under God for them. Then one day, as GC once told me, the kids will discover that I'm not perfect and will decide that I don't really know anything.
Friday, April 14, 2006
I'm done
I need more and better sleep. Between work and the kids, this is getting ridiculous and I don't think I can take it any longer. In the Screwtape Letters, there is a relevant excerpt on fatigue:
The paradoxical thing is that moderate fatigue is a better soil for peevishness than absolute exhaustion ... It is not fatigue simply as such that produces the anger, but unexpected demands on a man already tired. Whatever men expect, they soon come to think they have a right to: the sense of disappointment can, with very little skill on our part, be turned into a sense of injury ... To produce the best results from the patient's fatigue, therefore, you must feed him with false hopes ... Exaggerate the weariness by making him think it will soon be over; for men usually feel that a strain could have been endured no longer at the very moment when it is ending, or when they think it is ending. In this, as in the problem of cowardice, the thing to avoid is the total commitment. Whatever he says, let his inner resolution be not to bear whatever comes to him, but to bear it "for a reasonable period" - and let the reasonable period be shorter than the trial is likely to last. It need not be much shorter; in attacks on patience, chastity, and fortitude, the fun is to make the man yield just when (had he but known it) relief was almost in sight.
Perhaps relief is in sight, perhaps not. There are plenty of people worse off in this regard than me - including my wife, my sister-in-law NGR, and her husband TR. Honestly, that doesn't give me much (if any) comfort. Clearly they are better people than I am in this regard. I'm at my breaking point. On this count, the Devil appears to have won since my "reasonable period" came to an end last night. I'm not sure what to do. Physically and mentally I feel defeated ... I'm done ... game over.
The paradoxical thing is that moderate fatigue is a better soil for peevishness than absolute exhaustion ... It is not fatigue simply as such that produces the anger, but unexpected demands on a man already tired. Whatever men expect, they soon come to think they have a right to: the sense of disappointment can, with very little skill on our part, be turned into a sense of injury ... To produce the best results from the patient's fatigue, therefore, you must feed him with false hopes ... Exaggerate the weariness by making him think it will soon be over; for men usually feel that a strain could have been endured no longer at the very moment when it is ending, or when they think it is ending. In this, as in the problem of cowardice, the thing to avoid is the total commitment. Whatever he says, let his inner resolution be not to bear whatever comes to him, but to bear it "for a reasonable period" - and let the reasonable period be shorter than the trial is likely to last. It need not be much shorter; in attacks on patience, chastity, and fortitude, the fun is to make the man yield just when (had he but known it) relief was almost in sight.
Perhaps relief is in sight, perhaps not. There are plenty of people worse off in this regard than me - including my wife, my sister-in-law NGR, and her husband TR. Honestly, that doesn't give me much (if any) comfort. Clearly they are better people than I am in this regard. I'm at my breaking point. On this count, the Devil appears to have won since my "reasonable period" came to an end last night. I'm not sure what to do. Physically and mentally I feel defeated ... I'm done ... game over.
MV to SLC
My wife and I decided to bring the family to Salt Lake City, Utah for the Easter holiday. We were thinking about flying but ultimately decided to drive. From Mountain View, California, it was a 800 mile drive and took about 13 1/2 hours. With two little kids (both of whom had a "bad body" - stomach bug - that day), that's some great time. All things considered, I was really surprised that everything went as well as it did. No traffic, no problems with the car, no rain or snow, the kids did great, and I didn't get drowsy at the wheel. When we left the house that morning, my wife said a little prayer. When we got settled in SLC, I made sure to thank God for listening. The following excerpt from the Screwtape Letters was top of mind:
Don't forget to use the "Heads I win, tails you lose" argument. If the thing he prays for doesn't happen, then that is one more proof that petitionary prayers don't work; if it does happen, he will, of course, be able to see some of the physical causes which led up to it, and "therefore it would have happened anyway," and thus a granted prayer becomes just as good a proof as a denied one that prayers are ineffective.
We'll see how things go next week with the drive home. I doubt they'll go as smoothly as the way out but perhaps I'll be surprised again - and thanking God again for listening.
Don't forget to use the "Heads I win, tails you lose" argument. If the thing he prays for doesn't happen, then that is one more proof that petitionary prayers don't work; if it does happen, he will, of course, be able to see some of the physical causes which led up to it, and "therefore it would have happened anyway," and thus a granted prayer becomes just as good a proof as a denied one that prayers are ineffective.
We'll see how things go next week with the drive home. I doubt they'll go as smoothly as the way out but perhaps I'll be surprised again - and thanking God again for listening.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Sudoku solver
I'm proud of myself. I did my first Sudoku puzzle the other night. After doing it, I decided to create a solver in Microsoft Excel - I am a finance / Excel geek after all. It turned out to be pretty nifty (download here). The spreadsheet uses a combination of Excel formulas and Visual Basic code to solve the puzzle. And the VB code uses recursion to test various permissible permutations of unknown values. The performance is pretty good. Beginner puzzles are solved in a couple of seconds. Expert puzzles take a couple of minutes. I tried it out with Web Sudoku and it worked well.
Anyway, it was a fun, creative challenge. A nice distraction from the other stuff I have going on at work. And a good excuse to brush off some old programming skills and learn some new stuff in Excel. Glad to see I haven't lost all my old computer science knowledge.
Note: If you intend to use the solver, you'll need to have macros enabled in Excel. To do that, in Excel, go to Tools -> Macro -> Security and select medium security. That way, when you open spreadsheets that contain macros, you will be prompted whether you want to enable or disable them.
Anyway, it was a fun, creative challenge. A nice distraction from the other stuff I have going on at work. And a good excuse to brush off some old programming skills and learn some new stuff in Excel. Glad to see I haven't lost all my old computer science knowledge.
Note: If you intend to use the solver, you'll need to have macros enabled in Excel. To do that, in Excel, go to Tools -> Macro -> Security and select medium security. That way, when you open spreadsheets that contain macros, you will be prompted whether you want to enable or disable them.
Saturday, April 08, 2006
The creative act
I had dinner with GC (a friend and co-worker) the other night. After talking about work stuff for awhile, I asked him where he stands on spiritual matters. GC and I have very different backgrounds so we complement each other very well (and have developed some great thinking at work as a result). So I thought getting his perspective on spirituality would be helpful as part of the process I'm going through right now. Our discussion covered a lot of ground. One of the things GC mentioned was the creative act. He and I had talked about the creative act a number of times before - but never in the context of spirituality.
After I got home from that dinner, I did some Google searches and came across this 1957 speech by Marcel Duchamp. One of the concepts that I found interesting in Duchamp's speech is the interplay between an artist and the spectator of his/her art. As Duchamp puts it, "the creative act is not performed by the artist alone; the spectator brings the work in contact with the external world by deciphering and interpreting its inner qualification and thus adds his contribution to the creative act." The concept of an "art coefficient" is also introduced - specifically, "the personal 'art coefficient' is like a arithmetical relation between the unexpressed but intended and the unintentionally expressed."
I had never thought about art in this way. Perhaps there is a similar interplay at work between God and human beings in which we all have a role to play in completing the creative act that God began. And perhaps there is a personal "spiritual coefficient" that relates what is unexpressed but intended by God to what He (or books like the Bible) unintentionally express to each of us.
After I got home from that dinner, I did some Google searches and came across this 1957 speech by Marcel Duchamp. One of the concepts that I found interesting in Duchamp's speech is the interplay between an artist and the spectator of his/her art. As Duchamp puts it, "the creative act is not performed by the artist alone; the spectator brings the work in contact with the external world by deciphering and interpreting its inner qualification and thus adds his contribution to the creative act." The concept of an "art coefficient" is also introduced - specifically, "the personal 'art coefficient' is like a arithmetical relation between the unexpressed but intended and the unintentionally expressed."
I had never thought about art in this way. Perhaps there is a similar interplay at work between God and human beings in which we all have a role to play in completing the creative act that God began. And perhaps there is a personal "spiritual coefficient" that relates what is unexpressed but intended by God to what He (or books like the Bible) unintentionally express to each of us.
Email to Jesus
My sister-in-law HG babysat the kids today while my wife and I went to a play. When we returned, HG told us that JD (our older son) mentioned sending email to Jesus twice in his prayers and wanted to know whether we had taught him that. The answer is no. But the more interesting questions in my mind were (a) where did he pick that up and (b) since when does JD pray? On the first question, our collective theory was that JD made it up on his own. If you can send email to a friend or family member, why can't you also send email to Jesus? On the second question, HG says a little prayer before eating meals and I guess JD picked up on that. As an aside, I'm fine with JD praying. I've just never seen him do it myself.
Sending email to Jesus (more generally God) is an interesting concept to me. In many contexts, I much prefer email to other forms of communication. It's asynchronous so you can take time to craft your message exactly the way you want. But it can also be near real-time if the other person is online. It's obviously not appropriate in certain situations but, in general, I really like the medium. Right now, it's hard for me to pray verbally. In a prior post, I said that pride is a challenge for me. I think the thing that holds me back from praying is that I'm not ready to "submit" to God - that I'm not ready to be humble before God. But email could potentially be easier. Rather than having to submit to God, perhaps it would be more like sending him a message - simply sharing some thoughts (similar to this blog). There obviously wouldn't be a response (as is possible with prayer) but some communication is better than none.
All of this lead to a rather random idea. Extending JD's idea one step further, if you could send email to God, why not instant-message with God? There are AIM Bots out there like SmarterChild. Why not create an Eliza-like bot that would pretend to be God? One of the reasons that Joseph Weizenbaum decided to make Eliza a therapist is because the therapeutic situation is one of the few real human situations in which a human being can reply to a statement with a question that indicates very little specific knowledge of the topic under discussion. For example, the question "Who is your favorite composer?" can be answered acceptably with responses such as "What about your own favorite composer?" or "Does that question interest you?" Relating this to God and the Bible, in Opening the Bible, Merton tells us that "the Bible raises the question of identity in a way no other book does ... When you ask: 'What is this book?' you find that you are also implicitly being asked: 'Who is this that reads it?' ... If we ask it for information about the meaning of life, it answers by asking us when we intend to start living?" Sometimes God gives us answers but, much more often, He answers our questions with questions of his own.
I'm not going to write a GodBot. I don't have the time and most people would probably find it blasphemous. But it does make me wonder what it would be like to communicate with God using modern technology (email, AIM, etc). The movie Bruce Almighty comes to mind - the scene where Bruce (have been given almighty powers) opens his email inbox of prayers, is overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of them, and simply hits "grant all". At the end of the day, though, I suppose it's more important to communicate with God in a humble, sincere way than how specifically you choose to communicate with him.
Sending email to Jesus (more generally God) is an interesting concept to me. In many contexts, I much prefer email to other forms of communication. It's asynchronous so you can take time to craft your message exactly the way you want. But it can also be near real-time if the other person is online. It's obviously not appropriate in certain situations but, in general, I really like the medium. Right now, it's hard for me to pray verbally. In a prior post, I said that pride is a challenge for me. I think the thing that holds me back from praying is that I'm not ready to "submit" to God - that I'm not ready to be humble before God. But email could potentially be easier. Rather than having to submit to God, perhaps it would be more like sending him a message - simply sharing some thoughts (similar to this blog). There obviously wouldn't be a response (as is possible with prayer) but some communication is better than none.
All of this lead to a rather random idea. Extending JD's idea one step further, if you could send email to God, why not instant-message with God? There are AIM Bots out there like SmarterChild. Why not create an Eliza-like bot that would pretend to be God? One of the reasons that Joseph Weizenbaum decided to make Eliza a therapist is because the therapeutic situation is one of the few real human situations in which a human being can reply to a statement with a question that indicates very little specific knowledge of the topic under discussion. For example, the question "Who is your favorite composer?" can be answered acceptably with responses such as "What about your own favorite composer?" or "Does that question interest you?" Relating this to God and the Bible, in Opening the Bible, Merton tells us that "the Bible raises the question of identity in a way no other book does ... When you ask: 'What is this book?' you find that you are also implicitly being asked: 'Who is this that reads it?' ... If we ask it for information about the meaning of life, it answers by asking us when we intend to start living?" Sometimes God gives us answers but, much more often, He answers our questions with questions of his own.
I'm not going to write a GodBot. I don't have the time and most people would probably find it blasphemous. But it does make me wonder what it would be like to communicate with God using modern technology (email, AIM, etc). The movie Bruce Almighty comes to mind - the scene where Bruce (have been given almighty powers) opens his email inbox of prayers, is overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of them, and simply hits "grant all". At the end of the day, though, I suppose it's more important to communicate with God in a humble, sincere way than how specifically you choose to communicate with him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)