WHY DCM: Interrogative essay

Why develop a Christian mind? As believers, don’t we only have to say “I believe nature points to the existence of God” to validate our faith? Do we need to develop arguments to try to support this point? Or is Christianity just simply about faith and not reason? These are questions I asked myself at one point in my Christian walk. I regret to say that my faith in Christianity, while in high school, was based strictly on emotion and not reason. As a result, I suffered from constant heartache. It wasn’t that I didn’t love the Lord; it was just that I couldn’t live like the apostle Peter encouraged; “Always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.”[1] My hope in Christ was not based on an intellectual understanding of the word, but rather, on the beliefs of those around me. But, as I quickly learned, the faith of those around me was not enough to sustain my own. As a result, I was in trouble of finding reasons for a faith that was slowly fading. I know brothers and sisters in faith who struggle with the same problem. Their faith in Christ is strong, as long as they don’t have to answer to any educated non-believer as to why they believe their faith is real. I don’t believe this is the way faith in Christ is supposed to be.

One of the things I have been learning over the years, and learned even more in my “Developing a Christian” mind course, is that faith in Christ does make sense. It is not a collection of incoherent myths and superstitions (as some atheists claim). It seems, though, that Christians don’t care to understand their faith, and some question, even discourage, intellect mixing with their faith. Although, such people may think they have a strong basis for this belief, they are making claims that are not founded on biblical principals. After all, when asked what is the most important commandment of all, Christ answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” [2] In this way, Christ shows that it is just as important to devote your mind to God as well as your heart. You cannot fully love Him with out both. Therefore, developing the mind is just as essential.

There may have been a time when believers could get by without having to understand their faith intellectually, but it is clear that that time has pasted. With a new slew of attacks on faith by atheistic forces, no longer can a person get by without some knowledge concerning their faith. However, as ideal as it may be, not all of our Christian brothers and sisters have the means to seek such knowledge. As a result, they need those who are seeking that knowledge to impart what they know. As Lewis says in a sermon he preached in the Church of St. Mary the Virgin,

If all the world were Christian, it might not matter if all the world were uneducated. But, as it is, a culture life will exist outside the church whether it exists inside or not. To be ignorant and simple now – not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but as against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered. The cool intellect must work not only against cool intellect on the other side, but against the muddy heathen mysticisms which deny intellect altogether. [3]

In this, Lewis is calling all members of the body of Christ to do their part in the battle against the “world”. As someone seeking an intellectual understanding of God and the Bible, I see it as my duty to use my God given gifts and desire to glorify Him, to equipping other “saints” with the knowledge I have been given - I am furthering His kingdom in a fallen world.

In his book, Engaging God’s World, Cornelius Plantinga says our vocation should be used to advance God’s Kingdom. His understanding, as I see it, is that all we see is for the glory of God. As believers, our primary focus should be to use all the resource He has given us to do what He has commanded us to do; spread the gospel. Over two thousand years after his resurrection, however, it seems most Christians have forgotten our great commission. We are now more interested in our own lives than the mission entrusted to us. In so doing, however, we show that we care more about using the resources handed to us for our own gains. Of course, the problem we often over look with this kind of mindset is that a person who calls himself a Christian but desires God given gifts more than Christ is not a Christian at all. As a believer, I have been equipped with the desire for knowledge. It would be to the glory of God if I mastered my desire and, in turn, bless other believers with the tools needed to continue spreading the gospel.

Combating unbelief in the 21st century is synonymous with combating subjectivism and relativism. As Christian intellectuals, we have to be aware that there are people who believe all moral laws and truths are subject to what “the group” likes, thus, relativism is becoming more and more customary. Even Christians, nowadays, use relativism to defend their faith when they face objections. It saddens me when I hear a believer say things like ‘truth for me, doesn’t have to be truth for you.’ This, however, can’t be the case because if what is true for you only has to be true for you, then you give people an open gate to assume what ever they think to be true is necessarily true, thus, creating their own convenient truths. But, if there is one thing in life that we are aware of, it is that all “so called truths” cannot be true. It further saddens me because this way of thinking, amongst believer shows me we have become intellectually complacent.

Like relativism, a closer look at subjectivism, will prove it to be non-sense. In the “Poison of Subjectivism,” C.S Lewis examines the dangers in this train of thought. In his sermon to an audience dealing with the issues of WWII, Lewis says,

Out of this apparently innocent idea comes the disease that will certainly end our species (and, in my view, damn our souls) if it is not crushed; the fatal superstition that men can create values, that a community can choose its ideology as men choose their clothes. Everyone is indignant when he hears the Germans define justice as that which is to the interest of the Third Reich. But as it is not always remembered that this indignation is perfectly groundless if we ourselves regard morality as a subjective sentiment to be altered at will. Unless there is some objective standard of good, overarching Germans, Japanese, and ourselves alike whether any of us obey it or not, then of course the Germans are as competent to create their ideology, as we are to create ours. [4]

If we claim that there is no absolutes truths like the Ten Commandments; then we destroy any claims we might otherwise have to prevent such people like Hitler or any other evil dictators from doing anything they want and cripple humanity in the process.

In “Engaging God’s World,” Cornelius Plantinga also says that it is the duty of Christians to defend justice. To do so would require us to be familiar with God’s moral absolutes. For example, if a Christian were to ever say that a person could abort their baby, on the grounds of choice, we, in essence, destroy any other claims we have about how humanity should conducts itself.

Over all, the DCM class was a great tool to reinforce my faith as well as give me new reason to fight for truth. Due to this class, my desire to make the name of Christ known in the nations has been re-invigorated. In the “weight of glory,” Lewis gives one of his best supports for evangelism when he said,

We are half-hearted Creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like a ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.[5]

When we evangelize, we call people to leave behind their mud castle, gaze up at the cross and see the offer of everlasting glory with their maker.

Bibliography

Plantinga, Cornelius, Jr. Engaging God’s world; A Reformed vision of Faith, Learning, and Living. Grand Rapids: Everdmans, 2002.

Holy Bible: English Standard versions. Wheaton: Crossway Bible, 2007.

Lewis, C.S. “Learning in War-Time.” Church of St. Mary the Virgin, oxford. 1939. Lecture.

Lewis. C.S. “The Poison of Subjectivity.” From Christian Reflection. 1967.

Lewis. C.S. “The Weight of glory” Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Oxford. 1942. Lecture

---

[1] (1 Peter 3:15). This is from the ESV Bible.

[2] (Matt 22:37), ESV Bible.

[3] Lewis, C.S. “Learning in War-Time.” Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Oxford. 1939

[4] Lewis. C.S. “The Poison of Subjectivism.” From Christian Reflection. 1967

[5] Lewis. C.S. “The weight of glory.” Church of Saint Mary the Virgin, Oxford. 1942.

The value of Pain

Why does God allow us to feel pain? What is the purpose of suffering? This questions have boggled the hearts and mind of humanity since, I would venture to say, the beginning of time. But, the question, i believe needs to be asked, does pain serve a purpose? His there a reason for why their is suffering? I believe the answer to all this question is yes.

First off, pain serves a purpose that we often over look. It shows us, we are not in total control of our surroundings. Everyone can attest to the powerless feeling that accompanies pain. For example, when we are playing sports, we often feel like there is nothing we can't do. We feel in control of every outcome in the game. We feel invincible, that is, until we injure ourselves and the pain that comes with injury makes us, reactively, open our months and scream out in pain. So, in this sense, I would say that God uses pain to remind us that there are thing we don't have control over.

Secondly, there is a helplessness that comes with pain, which always makes us call out for help (in most cases, call out to a higher power). It does not amaze me that in times of disaster, people call for God. It seems that in times of pain, such as September 11th and natural disasters, is when you find people wanting to reconnect with God. A person may have spent all their time not caring for God, but when disasters hit, we very quickly want to ask God why he allows such thing to happen. So, if nothing else, pain reminds us that deep inside we all feel as though there is a reason to the pains we feel so we look to our maker to give us the answer.

Lastly, a Christian should never over look the infinite worth of pain. For, on the cross, our savior take on the ultimate pain to save us from everlasting pain. When a believer takes a close look at the Cross, he or she must feel the weight of it. In seeing the savior, we come to a full realization that the pains he felt are pains which belongs to me. So, If I may attempt to put a reason behind why God allows pain. It is to remind us that, when we feel pain, what we feel is infinitely less than what his son felt in our stead. Upon looking at the cross, it should move us, because upon that cross was one who did not deserve the pains, but out of love, took it.

Just a quick reminder, scripture tells us that we "Have a high priest who is able to sympathize." I believe the reason is because he felt pain like we do.

Paradise Now

The movie paradise now, is about two Arabic brothers who were asked by community leaders to stage a suicide bombing which will result in the killing of Israeli citizens. The movie takes watchers through the minds of the bomber as each person is dealing with their impending action. The movie showed us the indoctrination of a suicide bomber. The two brother are persuaded into agreeing with the plan by promises from their leaders. Such promises like, you were chosen for this, this is god will and two angles will pick you up upon your death and carry you to heaven, were enough to put the two brother on the path to their their goal. When the day of the mission came, their plans were foiled when they were spotted by a patrol car. While running to evade capture, the two brothers were spilt up. Khaled (the older brother) was taking back to the hiding spot while Said (the younger brother) had to find his way back. After spending the whole day, with a bomb strapped to his chest, Said was tracked down by his brother and returned to Jamel (the leader of their group).

After a brief debriefing, Jamel decided they should try their plan again, if the boys were willing. Khaled, who had previously being excited to carry out the plans, now became hesitant, while Said who had being doubting the plan along became even more sure that suicide bombing is the only way yo get their message across. When they day of their plan came, Khaled decided this was not he right thing to do and backed out of the plan. Said decided he was going to go ahead with the plan and locked his brother in the car that came to pick them up and watched the car drive away. The final scene in the movie is Said sitting in a bus with several Israeli soldiers and civilians. The camera closes on his face and the whole screen went white (meaning he had pulled the trigger) followed by a dark screen.

I hate (with deep animosity) idiotic indoctrinations which attempts to convince people that it is good to kill other people for a selfish cause. Wether it Hitler and the Nazi or people like Jamel who prey on the weak to carry out their devious plans. I always have the thought (as I did with this movie) on my mind of "Why, is you believe in this idea so much, can't you do it yourself." I believe it takes a coward of a person to recruit people to do their dirty work while they stand in the shadows and give reason to justify their evil. Jamel tell the two brothers of the pending glory of taking their own live to further his cause. But, there is no glory in such thing, just murderers and the murdered. The justification of trying to solve a problem with violence will only lead to more violence.

In the end I thought the movie was a good way to show what goes on in a world I know nothing about. It did a great job of showing me the psychology of people like Jamal. It also showed me the hardship of living in a world in which you feel oppressed with no sense of a way out. Such was the case with Said, I just believe he tried to fix the problem the wrong way. In the case of Khaled, he was shown, by a friend, that taking someone else's life due to anger is not a just cause but revenge.

Man or Rabbit: Have we forgotten what this is really about

"One of the things that distinguishes man from the other animals is that he wants to know things, wants to find out what reality is like, simply for the sake of knowing. When that desire is completely quenched in anyone, I think he has become something less than human." In this, Lewis in pointing towards the heart of man and his desire to throughly know thing. We were created with an innate desire to know that what we are and what we see are really real. As Lewis mentions in the following sentence, "I don't believe any of you have really lost that desire. More probably, foolish preachers, by always telling you how much Christianity will help you and how good it is for society, have actually led you to forget that Christianity is not a patent medicine."

When you look at our culture today (especially the American culture), it seem people would rather use God as what scholars call Therapeutic Deism. By Therapeutic Deism, I mean a God that makes you feel good. Christianity, as it were, is not free from this idea either, as a matter of fact, more and more people are starting to look at the Christian God in such a fashion. It seems as though we think of God as just a being needed when one needs a little pick-me-up and then put back on the shelves of our medicine cabinet. This, of cause, would led me to ask wether or not we still remember what this whole Christian faith is all about. After all, as Lewis says, the way Christians see the world, should be different from everyone else. If we, believers, really believe Christ to be the risen God, then we are saying the only way to see the world as it really is, is through the eye of a Christian (after all our faith claims to have the truth).

But, as it would now seem, Christian are starting not to claim their religion as the absolute truth but rather a way to make your life better (this is a good load of crap). It must be true as Lewis says, "If Christianity is untrue, then no honest man will want to believe it, however helpful it might be; If it is true, every honest man will want to believe it, even if it gives him no help at all." This is the case because Christianity claim something far beyond just being a good person. To attempt to clarify what Lewis is saying, If a person find out that the claims of spending eternity with the creator were actually true, they would be foolish to not put their hopes in it, it wouldn't even matter if they didn't achieve being a good person on earth because they would know the hopes of the next world is greater.

Now, there are those who foolishly say to people "give your life to Christ and he will make you a better person." To this people, it is clear to me they have lost the real reason Christ died. I do have to say though, that I admire their efforts of trying to generate better citizens, but their way of doing so, is just simply wrong. Christ never says to anyone "I have come to die, that you may be a better person." But, rather "I have come, that you may have life and have it to the full." With this Christ is suggesting that the life we have now is not full, not that we are not good persons. Christ is saying, we are living incomplete life and the completeness is found in Him. The error of saying to people Christ will make you a better person is that people already do "good" (not in the sense of glorifying God) without Christ. So it would follow that a person wouldn't have the need to follow Christ if all Christ was offering is a life of good deeds.

Christ, on the other hand, is the real meaning of life. In him can life be lived as it is suppose to be, glorying to God. Equally as ridiculous are those who say "Christ will give you a better life." I am afraid, though, that I do not now have the time to go into such matters.

The fellowship of the inner ring

Inner rings, almost everyone has them. Those who do not, are either trying to get into one or seeking to form their own. It will be worth while to mention that inner rings are not necessarily bad things. As a matter of fact, they could be good for growth and encouragement. After all, everyone needs to belong somewhere. Christianity is one big inner ring of people who call themselves by the name of Christ. But, as mentioned by Lewis, there can come a point in which inner rings become detrimental to one well being. We have seen many evils (big and small) done in the name of inner rings. People have turned their backs on seeking Christ because of how some Christian within a church acted towards them. People have killed themselves because they were treated badly by some punks who think themselves to cool for other people and in the case of gangs, we have seen lives ended because people from one inner ring having animosity towards people of other inner rings.

As followers of Christ, however, we are called to be different. This, as I see it, will entail being loving to all people and accepting all people. But, even in this, there are things to do and not to do. As I mentioned earlier in class, church is not an event for unbelievers. I know this may sound harsh and someone will be say "how can you exclude anyone from church," but I believe a closer look at church itself will make this idea clear. At a church service, members of the congregation pray, sing and hear faith affirming sermon from their pastors. To a non-believer, non of this would matter or even make any sense. To see this differently, it would be like going to dinner with an italian family, which the whole dinner are speaking italian (which you don't speak), but every once in a while, one of the family members look at you and smile, hoping you are following the conversation; The problem is, of cause, no one as taking the time to teach you the language or even try to explain what's going on; had they done so, you would be fully in the conversation like one of the family members. This is the same thing when a non-believer goes to church, they sit in the pews wondering why everyone is so attentive, while, they feel like sleeping. It would make much more sense if someone had actually taking the time to tell he/her the gospel (like we are called to do) so that what they hear in the pew make sense.

Now, this is the point someone might object by saying, "what about Christ? he did not exclude anyone." At this, I would have to invite the person to a closer look at Christ. It is true that Christ showed all people love (as we are also called to do) but, it is clear that Christ separated all other people from his disciples. Christ never allowed just any person to follow him, all those who followed him (as disciples, or helpers) were told to follow him on the condition that they leave their old lives behind. Christ never said to a prostitute "continue sinning and follow me," it was clear that those who choose to follow him were not willfully committing sinful acts. Further, the apostle Paul made it clear that church service was designed for the believer, to the point that led him to encourage the church of Corinth (1 cor 5:1-2) to kick out the person on the basis that he was acting as an unbeliever (sleeping with his step-mother) till he repents of his sins.

Vocation in God's Kingdom

After a person as come to the full realization of the salvation brought by Christ on the cross. The next thing realize, which will lead to action, is realizing that you are called by God to do all things to the glory of his new. If, as a believer, I have died to this world and raised with christ, the next step is to being to live in this world as one who does all things to Christ and the for the advancement of the gospel. Sad to say though, it is clear that there are still people (lots of people) who think that to become a Christian just means going to church and taking the name of Christ and tagging it on anything. Sure people life their lives without a care of what's going on in the world. The idea of being like Christ, loving Justice and caring for orphans and widow in their distress is lost on them. To them, the Christian faith is just a system establish to make their life better and more comfortable.

This, of cause is a tragedy because the Christian life is so much more fulfilling than just living comfortably. As children of God, we are called to take is name to all parts of the world, that, also includes our vocations. As a student, I see it as my calling to learn all that the Lord will teach me (by Himself or means of other people) so that I can, in turn, take my knowledge and use it to take the gospel to all that would listen. It is heartbreaking the see the trend of selfish ambitions continue to permeate the American culture. It seems parent, rather then encourage their children to life for Christ, are encouraging them to pursuit a life of comfort. It, further makes me sad that those who pursuit a life of comfort are reformed people. Being a reformed person myself, I can not imagine (better yet, I don't make to imagine) finishing school, just getting a job and living comfortably with a wife and kids while the world is "Literally" perishing, when the call to take them the answer was giving to me by the God i claim to serve to the point of death. I just don't see how those who do it, do it.

YOU HAD ME AT 'LOVE ME THE WAY CHRIST LOVES'

Out of the fours loves, Eros, as Lewis calls it, is the love a man has for a woman (though, not sexual in general). Eros is the kind of love one feels when he or she sees someone attractive, as a result, they fall in love (at first sight). But, I believe it is vital to ask, "is this kind of love lasting?" Most people would like to say that it does; after all, isn't that what love is suppose to be like? I mean, what is the point of all those movies telling us stories of happily ever after if your not always going to be goggle eyed about "the one"?

As Lewis mentioned, 'Eros is not a love that is self sustaining, it has to be work at, if this is the case, then what is true love? I believe to answer this question, one would have to explore all other forms of love. As I see it, true love that should be desired, is love that is unconditional aka Agape. If agape, as shown in scripture, is a self sacrificing love, then, it would make sense why this is the kind of love God has for his beloved. The question still remains, however, of how we, as people, can ever achieve this kind of love. I believe, the true form of agape for humans is not yet fully possible, but, the general idea can be achieved.

When it comes to love, it is fact that you will not always be "in love" with your mate (in love meaning, the point in which you are head over heels for one another). But, it is also true that, for a christian, divorce should not be an option (at least, for me, I believe this to be the case), but there will be times of disagreements, so then, what do you do? This, I believe, is where the other forms of love come in. Combining affection and friendship love with Eros will help to sustain a marriage in times of turbulence. If true love (Agape) is love that alway sacrifices (I believe it is), then a good relationship is one that is reflecting a love like this. For example, if a couple were deciding to paint their house but each had different colors in minds, I believe this would be a pointless thing to debate about; as I see it, one person ( in this case the guy just because I am a guy and this is what I will do) should sacrifice their desires (paint preference) for the other person. Though I have never being married or even being in a relationship (I mean boyfriend, girlfriend kind of relationship), I do believe this kind of sacrificing will eliminate the little disagreement that can build up.

Of cause, I believe the most important part of any Godly relationship is God. For this reason, I believe the best thing a single person can do to find "the right one" is just to continue following God. One thing I have learned in my short adult life is this, If you are a person who is truly following Christ, you will not attract a person who is not (unless your idea of following Christ is living comfortably in your suburban home, with your kids, going to church every sunday, waking up everyday to go to your 9 to 5 and never seeking to do anything outside of your safe neighborhood for the glory of Christ aka the American dream, then chances are you will find someone who also wants to live the American dream, though, they may not be following Christ). For me (If it matters) I desire to go anywhere Christ may send me to spread his name, this means that I am fully committed to a life of hardship if that is what the lord would have me do. So, as it goes, I believe the person God is going to bless me with, will be a person with the same mind set. As it follows, I can tell a person who can serve Christ alongside of me after a few times of talking to them (unless they lie to me about who they are, in which case, I trust Christ to not make a relationship with such a person workout). It wouldn't be that I deem them not worthy to be with me (that would be stupid and and prideful), it would just simply be that they are not thinking of serving Christ the same way He gave me desire to serve him. Their desire would be what God puts on their hearts.

"A RELATIONSHIP THAT WILL LAST IS ONE THAT REVOLVES AROUND CHRIST AND DOESN'T MAKE THE OTHER PERSON a god." Trying to make them god is putting on them a burden they, nor you, can carry.

"If all the world were Christian, it might not matter if all the world were uneducated. But, as it is, a culture life will exist outside the church whether it exists inside or not. To be ignorant and simple now -- not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground -- would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. God philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered. The cool intellect must work not only against cool intellect on the other side, but against the muddy heathen mysticisms which deny intellect altogether." This, if for no other reason, should be a good reason for one to seek higher education. In a world were the atheistic regimes are mounting their battle horses and drawing their weapons to attack the christian faith, one can not afford to just be an anti-intellectual Christian anymore.

It seems over the past couple of years, more and more atheist are coming out gun blazing against the Christian faith (and all other religion) to attack and destroy anyone who would so dear to mention the name of Christ. People like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are using their intellectual abilities to try to destroy hope a religious people may hold in a creator. As Lewis elegantly stated, it is the jobs of those who have be called to a life of intellectual pursuit. When looking at the Christian body, we are made up of many parts each with his functions. While I believe every believer should be intellectually engaged in their culture, it would be difficult for some to pursuit such life because of the work they are already doing for the glory of Christ. As Lewis saw it, this is when those who are intellectual fill in the gap and give strength to those who may not possess the answers. By so doing, every member within the body of Christ will be doing its part to strengthen other members within the body.

If the Lord gives a person a desire for an intellectual life, then such a person should pursuit that life to the Glory of God. In turn, they should bless their brothers and sisters in christ (in any way possible) by imparting to them what ever wisdom or knowledge they is needed. If, as iron sharpen iron so one man another, then we as brother and sisters can and should sharpen one another any chance we get.

It is not awkward, nowadays, to see people going on and on about how spiritual they are. In fact it seems anyone who gets high and walks around would tell you how spiritual of an experience they had as they watch the trees change colors. But, as Lewis warns "Let us clear it forever from our minds. The work of a beethoven, and the work of a charwoman, becomes spiritual on precisely the same condition, that of being offered to God, of being done humbly as to the Lord." By this, a person could not just claim that any act they do is "spiritual" because such acts which are not done for the glory of God could not be so called. This is not to say that good music isn't good anymore or loving someone isn't an admirable act, but if the logic goes, that a truly spiritual act must be done to God in other to be spiritual, then we can not classify any act which is an imitation of true worship as "spiritual."

Blessed are the Redeemed: notes on Plantinga 4

The fall of humanity, through an act of disobedience, brought into action the full measure of God's grace towards in creation. His love and mercy was first shown immediately after the fall as The Lord "made garments of skin," and clothed his fallen creation. Throughout the history of the Israelis, God continually showed his love by forgiving them of their offenses, which they didn't seem to be able to not commit. All the while, God was giving foreshadows of the ultimate redemption that was to come in the person of Jesus Christ.

On the cross, Christ inaugurated the new world order and put the sting of death to death in glorious fashion. Christ death on the cross makes me think of the absolute power, knowledge, and wisdom of God. If one really thought about the way in which Christ conquered death, you may quickly realize what I realized, Christ put to death by way of death, and he did away with the power of sin by way of sin (with John Piper calls 'Spectacular SIn'). What I mean is this, the way in which Christ died was a sin, not just a sin but the worst atrocity ever committed, WE KILLED GOD. But, by the same death, which was a result of sin, God made death commit suicide. Now, this to me shows just how awesome of a God me serve.

By his act of using death to take away the sting of death and sin to make sin powerless, our God showed the infinite level of his sovereignty. In the same way, God shows just how sovereign he is over his creating. In his saving act, Christ (the second person in the trinity), brought the sovereign reign of God to light by showing God dominion over the power of hell and recusing his people from the clutches of the devil. God will further show is omnipotences when he breaks in the official of his everlasting Kingdom and does away with sin altogether.

"OUR GOD REIGNS, FOREVER HIS KINGDOM REIGNS"

Your words are Poison: note on subjectivism

"out of this apparently innocent idea comes the disease that will certainly end our species (and, in my view, damn our souls) if it is not crushed; the fatal superstition that men can create values, that a community can choose its ideology as men choose their cloths. Everyone in indignant when he hears the Germans define justice as that which is to the interest of the Third Reich. But it is not always remembered that this indignation is perfectly groundless if we ourselves regard morality as a subjective sentiment to be altered at will." This fine quote, for me, sums up my thought on subjectivism. If any men or group of people were to ever come and say that all moral laws and codes were merely subjective, it would be clear at that point that I could (be their own words) pick up a gun and shoot them, because, if moral laws (or any other law) was just subjective, then, the only ground I have to kill you is simply my desire 'to or not to.'

When looking at the Nazis, Pol pot in Cambodia, sterlin in Russia, and other evil men in history, I think it to be idiotic for any person that 'Thou shall not kill' is merely subjective. Contrary to what any scientist or post-modern thinkers may say, the human race as always survived by following the the "moral rule" which we believe to be even if we don't all think it came from God. It is because of our desire to protect all people, against men who would seek to disobey the moral laws, that we were able to put an end to Hitler and his band of murderers. As Lewis mentioned, if subjectivity in moral laws were the case, then Hitler would be right in killing the jews.

It would seem, though, that some, in their eagerness to remove God from the picture of humanity, would prefer if we just did away with moral law and create new ones. This idea, however, has many problem with it. With the notion of over-hauling all moral laws in other to make way for "better ones," they would be having us that the law they make is could be better than the once that already exist. They would, further, be hope that we would not assume that their laws are not based on selfish needs or the desire to be in power. But, of cause, this would also run into another issue. If their laws where made on the ground that a certain people should make laws for everyone else, then, it would be logical if someone else where to say 'I don't like you laws, lets make new ones. So it is claim that one would run into the issue of who should make any laws for all people within their group.

Anytime a group of people decide to make rules for any other people, trouble is sure to ensue.

"Fallen we are"

In chapter three of engaging God's world, Plantinga talks about the fall of man and its implications. After disobeying God, we became creature who desire their own glory rather than the glory of their God. In seeking to elevate ourselves, we have place other things in front of God and establish idols in place of his praise. "What are the ingredients in corruption? first, a corrupted person turns God's gifts away from their intended purpose. She perverts these gifts. For example, she might use her excellent mind and first-class education not to extend the reach of God's kingdom but just to get rich." I believe this quote to be a perfect illustration of the effects of the fall in a life. In this particular case, rather than this person seeing the joys of using her gift of education to in-turn glorify God, she uses it, rather, on seeking personal gain.

In another example of a person who uses their education to get above others so they could in turn condescend them, we see the desire to show other people how much higher in sociality they are. Christ, however, made it clear that our desires should be for him. as he says "those who deny me, I will also deny before my father. It is also made clear in scripture that all the things that we chase after will not satisfy us. IF one were to think clearly about it, it would make sense. How could you over look a God who was so loving to come down to earth to die, that we might be redeemed back to him. To refuse such love for earthly possessing does not make very much sense. this, of cause, speak to the effects of the fall, in that people can not recognize what's good for them even when its right in front of them. The only hope we have is that the spirit of God awaken us to the truth of the Gospel.

Lewis: The man behind the legend

After hearing all the things Lewis's friends had to say about a man that I do not know to much about. A few people mention this in class, but I feel like saying again that what I find most striking about the audio is the realization of how human Lewis was. In the midst of all the fantastic writing and the great books, one can easily forget that behind all of that is a really man, who really loved God, and who really suffered for the same of Christ. I was shocked as well as delighted to hear that he had time of loneliness, that he had time of grief, and that he had time of loses as well of triumphs. When thing about the people who have influenced us, it is easy to get disillusioned about what they may really be like in person. If a person were to ask me to draw a mental picture of Lewis, I would have a picture of a man sitting on his desk happily writing something. It is, however, in-lighting to know that he was not always like that.

I was glad to have heard for the months of those closest to him on just how much he loved his wife. His marriage is not something that I have heard a lot about (other then what I know from a grief observed). The depth of his love for her was beyond encouraging. It shows that he was a person who truly understood what it means to love your wife like Christ loved the church. I was relieved to understand that his seeming dislike of woman was simply due to his dislike of how he didn't have much intellectual woman around him. This is proven, further, by how he feel in love with the only woman (other than his mother) who did match and challenged him intellectually. It give me hope that God will send me a wife who matches and challenges me intellectually.

Mere Christianity

In one of his best known works, Lewis takes a closer look into Christianity and some of its claims. In his preface, lewis inquires into what people mean by the word Christian. He believe that when non-believe call a person a Christian, they mean to say "they think him a good man" (though not all non-believer think a believer to be good, as a matter of fact, over the past couple of decades the word Christians has had negative connotation). As I previously stated in class, the nation of a Christian being good is simply incorrect because the very idea of a Christians means a person who understands how un-good he is. I am a believer in Christ Jesus not because I believe myself to posses any good beyond other people. Upon coming to faith, I did not approach God and de-clear myself a good man who needed saving, but rather a sinner in need of His grace.

In his first chapter, Lewis tackles the law of human nature. As he stated, there is a law by which all people expect other to live. This law, is a law that we know exist, we know they are good laws and we feel its importance when some one breaks them in an act against us. This Laws, as Lewis mentioned, are clearly expressed by people when they are wronged. With phrases such as 'How'd you like it if anyone did the same to you?' or 'thats my seat, i was there first,' people express their knowledge of how others should act toward one their fellow men. As it follows, If there were no such laws (written down or in our hearts) there would be no basis in saying Hitler and the Nazis were wrong for killing all the jews. It would also follow, that, for a law to be wrong, there must be an opposite, which is right.

Some have objected to natural law by saying that all laws were man made. they follow up their statement by claiming there not being such things as right or wrong. It would not be surprising, however, to find the same man shouting at you when you do something he deems unfair. Now, If one was to follow such a persons logic (that there is no right or wrong) it would follow that it is not logical for the person to cry foul when any 'wrong' is done to him/her because he has no basis to do so under his believes. This is just the point Lewis makes, no one can live consistently thinking there is no right or wrong. At the moment wrong is done to them, they recognize the law of nature they so want to reject. No person at the time of the nazis regime, who looks in the face of dying Jews, would claim there not being such a thing as right or wrong. If this were ever the case, I would suggest the person be put in the same position as the jews and then see if he could continue to hold his position.

Regarding natural law, the reason for the law could not be found within the law itself. To find that out, one would have to look for the answer from the source of the law. Suppose I am able to make a law about my house and I make a law declaring all people forbidding to come within 300 feet of my house at any point, unless they notified me an hour before their coming. The reason for making this law is not within the law itself because the law says nothing about why I made the law, all the law says is that it exist. For all a person knows, I could have made the law because I have snakes that like to hide within my grass and attack any person that come within 300 feet and it so happens that I have to press a bottom which opens a trap door, leaving my grass free of snakes. Of cause, this would be the reason for the law but a person wouldn't know this unless they inquired of me (the source of the law) as to why I have such a law. It follows then, that any moral law made could not give a reason for it existence, to find that, one would have to ask the law maker.

Chapter four of Mere Christianity deals with an issue that I have being exploring for a while. That is, the authority science has in claiming the existence or non-existence of a creator. My conclusion (as well as Lewis's) is that science has no basis for ever making such a claim. Further, science can never make a claim against any biblical passages. The reason for this is simple, science can only make claims based on empirical evidences. science can tell us that there are things but it cannot tell us how those things got there. It is not logical to say that the universe came about through the big bang and then conclude that there is no God or that the bible is false. The claim of the big bang just says that something happened but it doesn't answer how it happened, and of cause it doesn't because it can't.

In his composition of letters called the Screwtape letter, Screwtape (a senior demon) is training his nephew demon (worn-wood) in the ways of deceiving a young man he calls the patient. In his attempt to led the man into hell, Screwtape coaches his nephew to use all means possible in other to accomplish the mission.

"The road to hell is a gradual road, a slippery-slop." This were the words of Screwtape to wormwood, which some how, seems very true. In the mind of Lewis, it seems as if the devil as devised a plan that is proven to work on unsuspecting souls. As it follow, the devil does not have to make a person commit murder in other to get them to hell, as a matter of fact, committing murder may actually led the person to a full realization of their sins and accept the saving grace of God. The better plan, as Screwtape saw it, is to led the patient into hell while making him think he is headed to heaven.

In this insightful exploration of the inner working of the enemy, Lewis brought to light some of the things we do in life which, he says, is a reaction to the workings of Screwtape and his other demon friends. Every time I do not feel like worshipping, praying or doing anything that would enrich my relationship with Christ, the enemy is smiling at a job well done. I have to confess, I know there are lots of moments that I do not feel like doing all this things. I believe the genius of this book is Lewis' knowledge of peoples weakness and his ability to draw out that weakness and bring the enemy's plan against those weakness out in the open. It is a bit nerve racking when I realize that every time I get into a place I don't feel like giving God my attention, that is the enemy's plans coming to fruition.

I have to say, though, as a believer who has been giving knowledge of the workings of the enemy, It kills me when his plans against believers works itself out in the lives of my friends and family. I know friends who are believers but just don't care to do anything that has to do with Christ and I have family member who seem to care more about money than they do about the gospel and in-fact seem to think of God more as a ginny in a bottle they can call on when they need something. Even in my own faiths, there are moments that I fall into the same trap of trying to give myself glory instead of God. It is disheartening when I think of times like this in my own faith and even more so the faith of those I love.

I believe though, time of realizing that we have an enemy who is after us at all cost, we have to remember that we have a God who promises to never let us go. I do believe there is a reason God puts ideas of this book into Lewis's head; but, I do not believe the reason is to bring us down or make us doubt our faith, on the contrary, this book I believe is meant as a tool to help us in the fight against the enemy. In war time, the best way to defeat your enemy is to know your enemy. With this book, Lewis has giving us a front row sit into seeing the plans of our enemy and even reviled to us their biggest weakness; They don't know God's plan. As believers, we know that all of Gods plans, are plans for us to be spiritual victors.

For all those who are made nervous by Screwtape, there is one point I believe you must keep in mind, Screwtape's ultimate plan did not succeed. This I believe is Lewis letting us know that God will always win the battle for our souls, as a matter of fact, Christ on the cross declared the war for our salvation "Finished."

ALL THAT REMAINS IS A FEW BATTLES!!!!!!!!!!!

The Weight of Glory

In the beginning of the weigh of glory, Lewis examines our understanding of who we are as believers. In his first conclusion, he explored our thoughts on desires. To Lewis it is clear that as creatures of the creator, we sometimes believe that our desires are to high, but as Lewis stated "We are half-hearted creatures," we fool around in gutters making mud pies because we do not understand that there is something much more better. I see this clearly in our culture today.

We are creature who do not understand the beauty of real things, so we seek after imitation. We are far to cowardly to fight for anything that matters, so we seek the fulfillment of manliness in playing with toy soldiers conquering plastic fortresses or watching two gladiators in UFC facing off against one another as we beckon our favorite fighter to victory, so we too, can feel the glory of conquering our foe, all the while, in our spiritual lives, we are broken, defeated and fail to understand that with us stands a God who has giving us the tools needed to stand victorious against such attacks. In search of the meaning of love, we look to Edward and Jacob (in stories) to show us what love looks like and we eagerly await the response of Belle while hoping she would choose based on our lustful desires of who has a better looking body. Our hearts melt when we hear some cheesy line on screen from a man who says to a girl "I can't live without you," and say to ourselves "why can't I find love like that," all the while neglecting the greatest showing of love on the cross as our savior declares us Princes and Princesses of the most high King. It seems we are far to in love with imitations of real joys to look up and see him give himself for us on the cross.

As Lewis says, If we just understood that each individual standing before us could, in the next life, look like something we might, in this life, be tempted to worship; then, we might begin to catch of glimpse of just how important we are.

Another issue raised in the weight of glory is just how unsatisfying this world is compared to the next. For centuries, the devil has being trying to draw our focus away from the promises of the next world by trying to convince us that this world is the one that really matters most. As a result, we chase after meaningless things like drink, sex, and money in other to fulfill what such things cannot. If only we would focus on the hopes and promises of our savior, our hearts would be lined up with the things that he cares about, like taking care of widows and orphan in their distress. We further attempt to expand the important of this world over the next by clinging to such finite things as culture, arts, and civilization while refusing to assign to people the level of importance they deserve.

Perhaps one day we will learn to put all things in their proper place. Stop worshiping the earth and it material things and begin to sing praises to the God who made all things and who deserves the praise. Stop looking at one another as if we were nothing more than the lowest animal. Then and then might we begin to feel the weight of glory.

Plantinga Chap 2: Creation

The in the second chapter of his book "engaging God's world," Platinga explored the created world in the bible context. In the first part of the chapter, platinga looked into the beauty of the Trinity. As described, God's Tri-union is shown as one in which every person in the trinity if pouring all of itself into the other persons in the trinity. As observed in the gospels, Christ sought to teach this to his disciples by washing their feet the night of passover. Through out his teaching, Christ constantly show his disciple (as well as all who would call themselves believer) that to "be the highest, you must first be the lowest," and further showed them that a true leader is one who seeks to serve rather than be served.

It would seem in our world today, those who call themselves believers no longer recognize the beauty in being a servant. Christians in our society are caring far to much about their personal well being and not enough about the outside world. Perhaps, the really sad part about it is the ways in which people justify their actions or non-actions when it comes to doing the things of Christ.

In the next section of chapter 2, Plantinga brought to light (with the help of scriptures) the beauty of creation and the beauty that God himself pronounced upon his creation. Firstly, he clearly made it know that the reason for creation isn't because God got bored or lonely. It is true, as plantinga says, that God cannot be God without relationship, but God doesn't need to create other things apart from himself to get that relationship because within himself is a Tri-union of person which constantly pours into the other for all eternity. Plantinga also felt it necessary to mention that God neither created the world out of a whim or accident (since some say the world came to be by random chance). If God created not out of need or accident, then the conclusion would be that God created because he wanted to, which as Plantinga mention, is to say that creating is fitting for God.

From this, Plantinga focused his gaze on man. It is becoming more and more in todays world for people to give mankind more importance then they really warrant. This, of cause, it not to say we are not important, but I believe it is clear that man is not at the center of the world, after all the sun does not revolve around the earth but the earth around the sun. As I see it, a proper understanding of creation would bring to light the proper focus man should have and the over-consuming importance God should have, which in todays world is not the case, rather we see people (some Christians included) give themselves much more glory than the Creator. There are also those who give creation more glory than the deserving creator. This is the case with people who seem to care more about tree and even worship the tree than they do God.

In tainted vision of the creation other as also led to people who put highest importance were it does not belong in the world. When I see people talk about saving the planet and in the say breath say abortion is ok because "the woman as the right to chose," I have to ask "what the hell is going on in the world." Not to be out done however, there are lot of believers who think just because God says to subdue the earth mean we can do with it as we so please. Though both cases are bad, I do believe killing unborn babies under the justification of freedom of choice (which is really saying "I want to be convenient rather than face up to responsibility") is far worse then anything else.

As believers, though, we are called to be in the world but not of the world, which to me means to seek to do the right thing even if no one else is. Which is to say that in our world today, we should stand out like a sore thump for the glory of God, which is seeming like the opposite of what Christians want to do today.

Which is better, to learn for the joy of knowledge or to learn so you can get a degree and get a good job? before I give my opinion i will explore the benefits and disadvantages of both.

If i was to seek an education based on my desire for education, on the bright side, I will get a education that I desire, my education would be more enjoyable due to me studying something that I enjoy. on the flip side, there is a chance that what I chose to study will not be marketable. So, with this direction it would seem as if to study what I like could mean I would have to sacrifice a potential high paying job.

If, how ever, I study something which could get me a high paying job, I could be risking a happy job life in place of a well paying job. This is farther proven by the pole that just came out a few weeks ago showing that more and more American a unhappy with their jobs, even the once that pay high. An on satisfying job life also leads to other problem like problem with a unsatisfying home life and marriage. So with this route, I would run the risk of an unsatisfying job life in which I hate waking up in the morning to go to work.

After looking at both positions, it seems as if you either choose one or choose the other. I believe, however, that the first choice (with a little modification) is the better choice. If a person where to see "what about taking care of your family, isn't it better to get a higher paying job in order to do so." It would seem to me that he/she would be making an non-proved assumption in other to satisfy their desire. The assumption would be that a person needs a high paying job in order to take care of their family but choosing to do so runs the risk of a life that is not trusting God but rather trusting financial aspirations.

With all this aside, the better thing to do is to seek to learn a study which one desire to use to glorify God. I feel, though, there are a lot of people who don't think to glorify God in their profession but rather seek to make money because they think it will give them a happy life, some even hide it under the guise of "taking care of my family" when their desire should be I will seek to do Gods will and put the care of my family and myself in the hands of my God.

Plantinga: Longing and Hope

As a believer, my hope is in Christ and Christ alone and my long is in the life to come and not this life. I believe if a person has this two ideas in perspective, it brings all other things into focus. If Christ is my only hope, it makes it hard to be prideful in myself because Understanding that within myself lies nothing to which to be prideful about but as the apostle paul says "I boast in Christ alone." If Christ is all that in hope in, and I know that Christ (who I hope in) gave me something which I do not deserve but he gave it by grace alone, it breaks it into understanding as to why I was in-turn commanded to show grace to other who in-turn do not deserve it. If, however, I claim to have any hope in myself, i make Christ to be not and myself to be everything and thus establish myself as God while rejecting the one true God.

Like hope, if once longing is properly set in the right place, it will affect the very way we live. There a phrase often quoted to people who's focus is on heaven and not on earth, people say "you are to heavenly minded that you are not good for anything." I do not know the origin of this quote but I do know what it means now. It seems people (some Christian included) believe that Christians should not be so focused on heaven than they don't do any good on the earth (spiritually). I believe, however, that a person who is focused on heaven will do the greatest earthly good. My logic for such a statement is simply this, If Heaven is the real home of a believer, then the best thing a believer could do is to focus on it. Now, It is true that a person could so long for heaven that they neglect their mission on earth (the gospel) but I believe this is a believer who is not really in the same place Christ is.

As a believer, If I truly believe if you were heavenly minded, you would do the command of Christ to care for the orphans and widow in distress. You would be so heavenly minded that you would their to bring all people to the knowledge of Christ and thus bring them to the knowledge of their true home in heaven. In other words, you would begin to show people what a holiday at the beach looks like and show them just how ridicules it is to remain in the gutter making mud pies.

Do we have any rights, do we have some right, or is everything we have given to us from a gracious God. I believe the answer to this is actually rather simple. In a world in which the very breath we breathe is a gift from God, it would be difficult to then conclude that we have any other right given to us. It seems though, when it comes to happiness, it is ingrained in us as a right to which me must pursue at all cost; after all, it is one of the cores in our declaration, and like all good Americans, the pursuit of happiness is something we have fully embraced. Yet, it seems this idea, as Lewis saw it, was something that deserved a closer look.

In his essay, Lewis speaks of a Man and a Woman who leave their previous mates in other to find "happiness." In a discussion with a neighbor, it came to the attention of Lewis that the idea of happiness was one his neighbor felt their two neighbors deserved to have, even if that meant hurting somebody else. This kind of happiness, of cause, begs the question "What does it really mean to want to be happy," and If I have a right to that happiness, then by necessity, I also have a right to pursue that happiness at all cost. It seems to me though that thats just were the problem is, If you say to me, i have a right to pursue happiness, you are also saying that I have a right to do and seek out whatever makes me happy. I believe it is also clear that if my soul purpose was to be happy, I would make a lot of people unhappy in the process because If all I want is my happiness, then everyone else is just here for me to use in other to get to my happiness.

So then, as I see it, I or anyone else can not have a right to happiness or the pursuit of happiness. As Lewis concluded, saying I have a right to happiness is like saying "I have a right to be six feet tall," or "I have a right to have a father who is a millionaire." This to me would also beg the question "what happens when I am not happy," after all, Americans are supposed to be seeking happiness but yet not all Americans are happy. As it turn out, most American are not happy with their job some not happy with their marriage, kids and life in general. What happens at that point, should they just get another job and what if a person is not happy in their marriage, wouldn't it seem logical at that point (if they are seeking happiness) to just leave the marriage in search of what make them happy.

We find, then, that this mindset is what a lot of Americans have. Countries with far less than we have seem to be more happy than we are. Perhaps, it is due to their contentment with what they have been giving rather than a constant pursuit of something to make them happy. Like the saying goes "count you blessings daily." This quote, i believe a lot of people can benefit from.

I am right and you are not!!!!! note on Bulverism

The affects of what Lewis cleverly calls Bulverism undoubtedly has invaded and infected almost every part of our daily lives. As it now seems, no one cares for well reasoned arguments any longer, as long as you are able to accuse and maliciously attack your competitions, you will always get want you want. Whether in philosophical debates, political campaigns or just your simple everyday commercial, it is clear making fallacious argument (such as the straw-man argument) against your opponent is the route to success. Of cause, it shouldn't matter whether or debater and political candidates maliciously attack one another to get ahead, we as the people should catch such attacks and punish the attackers accordingly. Surprisingly enough, however, we seem to like it when our persons attacks and yet hate it when our persons get attacked.

I wouldn't have realized just how inconsistent people can be had it not been for this past election. In a race in which both parties were clearly attacking the other party, it was clear to see that attacking someone rather than their points isn't really seen as bad (as long as its the person I like not being attacked). I was even more shocked to find the grounds by which people voted for their candidates (Democrats and republicans) . I remember when Obama was announced as winning the election, I asked two of my co-workers as to my they voted for Obama, to my surprise they actually said because he was black. When I asked them why they felt it was ok to vote for a candidate simply based on skin color, they answer me (to my surprise, again) "well its about time we get a black president." Now, let me mention that I could understand the frustrations of waiting for such a long time for something to happen and I am not saying Obama couldn't have made a better President than McCain; but still, I would not put my hopes in a person based on his skin color. It seems after years and years of racial injustice, some black people find it justified to answer back with racial injustice of their own, but, of cause, their justification is that "white people are racist," what I really want to know is why people think its not a problem to answer evil with evil on the basis of evil.

My attempts here, of cause, is not to say Democrats are bad, the truth is Republicans are guilty of the same things (myself included). It is clear that when people choose who to vote for on anything, they seem to vote by appearances. We, of cause, have a few prejudices to help us out, such as "black people are athletic," "Asian people are smart," and white people are just... well... white!!!!

As not to be outdone, religious Bulverism also has had in influx of ideas from people who say there is no need for religious people to ever disagree because after all, they say, all religions are just taking about the same things (as if all the gods were in heaven sitting around a camp fire and singing cumbaya to one another as they roast marshmallows and vote on which god would rule next). Then there are those who claim that there is no absolute truth and then make their statements as if that were an absolute truth, all the while neglecting their contradictory statements and the fact that almost all religions claim to be the only absolute truth.

It seems Bulverist want to discredit everyone's ideas while affirming their own ideas as the truth, but as Lewis made clear, "The forces discrediting reason, themselves depend on reasoning. You must reason even to Bulverize. You are trying to prove that all proofs are invalid. If you fail, you fail. If you succeed, then you fail even more - for the proof that all proofs are invalid must be invalid itself."

JUST LOOK BABY!!!!!

regarding looking at or looking along something, I see both as important and equally valuable. In both cases, there are benefits that can not come from the other.

In looking at something, there are things to learn which will help in keeping a person from an experience that could be potentially harmful; In such cases, a person would be wise to learn from the knowledge gained from the "looking at" rather than seeking to experience the feeling itself before making a conclusion, which could have easily been made just by looking. If I was to say to a person "do not put your hands in a snakes face because it will bite you," and then show video of such cases happening, it would be wise for the person to listen to my advise rather than concluding that he could not really know what would happen unless he experiences it him/herself.

As follows, there are certain things that a person could only know from looking along. In areas of emotional hurting, a person could not claim to know anything about such pains unless he/she has experienced such pains. Furthermore, I would say that a person could not simply know of emotional hurt just because they themselves have felt a certain kind of emotional hurt, but, rather, the person would have to had gone through hurt which is the same or at lest similar to the hurt being felt by the person they are comforting. for example, when you loss a family member, you get people who try to comfort you by saying "I know what you are going through," but I find that method of comforting to be invalid simply because you can not know what a person who just lost their family member is going through unless you have lost a family member to the same degree (of importance or value to you) as the person you are comforting. even more specific, you can not comfort someone who lost their father by saying I know what you are going through on the basic that you once had a cat that died. The degree of emotional hurt just isn't the same (it could be possible that the cat was as important to the person comforting as the father was to the person being comforted). As I see it, all you can say is "I know their is pain that comes with losing someone, I know you are in that pain and I know how hurting feels," anything beyond this, is just venturing into the unknown (unless the person tells you how their hurting feels).

This, I believe is one of the reasons Christ died on the cross; by such death, the apostle paul can conclude that God is a God who is able to sympathize with us rather than a God who know our pain just from "looking at." Here, though, I am not saying that God would not have known how we felt just from looking at our pain (He could because he is God), I am saying, though, that there could be, and indeed there are instances in which a person says "how can God know my hurt." But knowing that God actually went through pain infinitely worse than any pain we could ever experience, helps to feel comfort because you know that the creator of the world really does know what you are going through, even if no one else understands.

There are, still, some instances in which but cases of looking at and looking along are beneficial, even necessary. A person may learn how to build a car just by looking at it, but the same person might tell you most of the "real" experience came from building a car by themselves, this is a case in which looking at gave something valuable and looking along also gave something equally valuable.

In cases of religion, there are roles in which looking at and looking along play. When it comes to having a personal relationships with a particular god, just looking at isn't going to serve any purpose other than to conclude that those people really believe what they are saying about their particular god. It also follows that just because you believe a particular go exists, doesn't led to the conclusion that such a god does exists. In the case of the savage who dances to Nyonga because he believe it would bring crops and babies, a person could not just simply see I know the dance works just because i believe it. As it follows in this particular case, we know that rain and crop does not come from dances. By this, i seek to show how moral or religious relativism (what is true for you is true for you and what is true for me is true for me) just doesn't hold up.

I feel, though, there are Christians who respond to their faith by just saying they believe it, with (as the Apostle paul say "have a reason for what you believe") no reason for the basis for their faith. Believing in something does not make it true or false. So, in this case, looking along something alone does not make it valid (if this were the case, every religion would be true) but just believing in your mind that Christ died on the cross, also, does not mean you have eternal life (looking at and not looking along). A true believer must both look at and look along.