Never giving up in a world of surrender

Hebrews 12:4 You have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood in your striving against sin

Too often certain moral failures (sins) are excused, defended, and promoted on the basis of experiences and failed struggles. "I tried not to be ____" or "I tried not to like _____" are viewed as proof that the reality is they were fighting against something that simply was a part of them (and the science scrambles to interpret various inane biological events and chemicals in a way that favors these theories). It's argued that they could not stop doing what they felt wrong doing because in actuality, that was a natural part of them- in fact it was only "wrong" to them because society impressed upon them it was wrong. Since it's natural to them we should embrace it as they have. They're happier without struggling.

This is a ridiculous and dangerous argument, because:
1. It presents the concept that something you cannot fight is simply natural AND that therefore it should be embraced.
2. If you argue that someone who cannot resist urges therefore must have been born with them, and therefore ought NOT to resist them (but rather embrace them and be lauded for them) - and that by extension the only reason they're wrong is because society tells them it is (but how dare society do so) - then it is no exaggeration to state that it follows that serial killers only do what is natural to them, and who are we as society to force them to struggle against what is just in their blood. Why can't THEY be happy? Who are WE to restrain them?

While sin is natural, it is NOT to be embraced. Our life is to be an endless and difficult battle against the constant temptations. We will fall disgracefully short in our struggles and must rely on God, but the simple and convicting fact remains that if a man must spend 80 years struggling futilely against for instance alcoholism or urges toward domestic violence he must nevertheless absolutely and unfailingly battle to the point of sweat, tears, and blood against those sinful urges.

He may even have a less than cheerful life, but better to have a life of struggle and pain and wisdom than a life of carefree and reckless desires which leads to damnation. "Choose you this day whom you will serve. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" as Joshua said, though in this context we might understand the weight of that statement better.
Indeed, we may find that decades of hard struggle will serve as a blessing in disguise as we come to appreciate the multitude of blessings and smaller joys that God has placed around us.

Truly, even if this entire life is a 100 year slog through mud and crap (metaphorically) filled with pain and loss and hurt and grief and desperate repentance, EVEN THEN it would be better that it were thus and we did not cease our striving but looked forward to the immeasurable rewards of eternity with God.



On a related note: WHEN will we realize the horrific damage we commit upon those who learn from us by failing to rebuke, or affirming, or accepting, or promoting their confused ideas and their sinfulness.

The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth

If truth is not objective - if there is no external source against which all is weighed - then all truth is subjective. We are of course fine with this concept insofar as the truth we personally hold to is allowed to exercise itself freely and is at least for the most part mirrored in the truths of those around us. It is too often only at the moment when our own subjective truths are challenged by the truths of others with more votes or more guns that we suddenly become loud advocates for objective truth - forgetting, of course, that we'd already buried it alive in the backyard after hacking away at its head with all our might.

The notion that things will remain in our favor is a desperate hope reminiscent of religious faith, though in actuality it is simply blindness. This, like all ideas, is nothing new. We are arrogant enough to believe that our morals today have always been what they are (ironically, like we were "born yesterday"), choosing not to see all the authorities and influences that crafted them in the earlier years of our lives, so why would we ever be concerned with the flow of history outside of ourselves?

In response to the loss of objectivity we grasp at objectivity by attempting to gift it to Science. If we take only what is observable and craft truths around it, we are able to say for a time (however long it takes to become honest) that we have discovered absolute truths. We conveniently overlook the basic fact that all things are observed and reasoned and comprehended within the utterly biased, prejudiced, presupposition-filled human mind, choosing instead (for the sake of argument, I suppose) to attribute a vacuum of bias and preconception to anything viewed with a microscope or telescope. We quietly ease the past misconceptions and wrong (though they were brilliant and clearly supported by mountains of evidence at the time) theories of science into the paper shredder in order to maintain the tidy desk upon which we can claim that science is the arbiter of all truth.

Therefore, bereft of any absolute truth in the human philosophies which is external to the inevitably prejudiced perception and reason of one man or another, we are left with 2 options:
1. To wring our hands, submit our votes, shake our signs and throw our fists in the vain hope that our beliefs will prevail upon society for at least as long as we are alive. The intellectual bankruptcy bothers us not at all so long as we are sufficiently situated. Just like a crack addict who's reached the bottom, losing everything as a result of his actions, we will most of us wake up when the time of pain comes upon us, but the night is young and intoxicants and stimulants are plentiful. Let us eat, drink, and be merry, because we surely shall not die.
2. Accept that there is absolute Truth, and that it is impossible for changeable man to be the arbiter. An external Creator - for a Creator determines truth, as it is that which is according to the Creator's Will - must exist and must have an established reality of good and evil. Serve God in fear and trembling and joy and love.

The first option is of course more pleasant now while the waves are low and we are able to surf about lazily, but we will howl and gnash our teeth greatly when the tide changes and we are sucked out to sea to drown, separated from Joy completely.

The second option seems less fun, but reveals itself to be all joy both in this life and in eternity when we begin to really comprehend God's purposes and promises.

Two handfuls of wind

“I was still young and the whole world of beauty was opening before me, my own officious obstructions were often swept aside and, startled into self-forgetfulness, I again tasted Joy. ... One thing, however, I learned, which has since saved me from many popular confusions of mind. I came to know by experience that it is not a disguise of sexual desire. ... I repeatedly followed that path - to the end. And at the end one found pleasure; which immediately resulted in the discovery that pleasure (whether that pleasure or any other) was not what you had been looking for. No moral question was involved; I was at this time as nearly nonmoral on that subject as a human creature can be. The frustration did not consist in finding a "lower" pleasure instead of a "higher." It was the irrelevance of the conclusion that marred it. ... You might as well offer a mutton chop to a man who is dying of thirst as offer sexual pleasure to the desire I am speaking of. ... Joy is not a substitute for sex; sex is very often a substitute for Joy. I sometimes wonder whether all pleasures are not substitutes for Joy.” 
― C.S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy

Humanity has a fascinating capacity for grasping at the limits of sensory experience while depriving themselves - wittingly or unwittingly - of the true potential and limits of sensory experience. The reality of this world is that everything fades, including experiences, memories, and thoughts. Our solution is to grasp at it. The simple fact is that during our striving after this wind we have been consistently lied to.

This lie is best revealed in our willful trading of eternal promises for the very temporary and soon-diminished pleasures of this life, but I have already written about the hope and joyful knowledge of eternity with God and how it ought to balance out our rush to encounter pleasures in this world. I'd like to turn and apply the theory strictly to this life. For the purposes of keeping this short, I'll look briefly at food and dating.

I am a great fan of food, a fact that can be verified visually. I love food, with its abundance and full potential of taste. I love how food, enjoyed in the proper time and manner, cannot lose its savor - every morning and indeed every cup of water presents a new opportunity for the enjoyment of great food. I have long been amazed at the design of the senses so that a little of something partaken of intermittently does not cease to be a fresh experience. A new flower smelled once daily does not cease to be a sweet smell. A lasagna dinner or a bite of ice cream when enjoyed on occasion hold their same savor or sweetness as on the first day you discovered them.

It is true however that too much input for any one sense diminishes how much you enjoy that experience. If I shove a whole pack worth of M&M's into my mouth, I'm given a sudden rush of taste. I'm a few ounces heavier with a few seconds of overwhelming pleasure to show for it, but then I take a drink of water, and what remains then of that taste? To be sure, the sugar continues to affect my body, but the joy I experienced in that rush was fleeting. In a moment even the memory may fade.

I find then that too much sensory bombardment provides fleeting excesses of pleasure followed by long dearths (or as is most often the case, escalated partaking - the adding of one bag of M&M's upon another) and it is therefore a grand deception that we should be led to seek our pleasure in this manner. I find that it is also the case that the same bag of M&M's when broken into small amounts and spread out over time so as to maintain the taste in my mouth would provide a prolonged enjoyment of the chocolate which would encapsulate a greater part of my day's experiences. It seems fair to state that a half hour of chocolate would carry greater value than a brief moment, and if I consume the same amount of chocolate in either case it would seem clear which was the better option.

*As a disclaimer allow me to admit that while I begin to understand these principles now I am far from practicing them well, though I seek to more and more.*

I think the argument works just as well when applied to intoxicating substances. I can easily drink too much alcohol in 10 minutes time and be completely overwhelmed with the sensation of drunkenness and all of its effects (I must disclose that I have never in fact been drunk and so am only an observer of such effects). The sensory rush, the brain-addling, and the loss of inhibitions will come quickly, and I may have a good time for a while. Yet I can nearly guarantee that the speed with which those pleasurable effects came upon me would match or fall short of the speed with which the negative consequences come upon me after. And after I have thrown up and dealt with the hangover (and perhaps other repercussions for what happened while I was drunk), what then have I achieved?

Consider then a moderated use of alcohol, as it is one of very few intoxicating substances which can be taken without immediately becoming high or drunk. Consider what a party would be like if I decided to drink 1 beer each hour over the course of 5 or 6 hours (speaking as a lightweight when it comes to alcohol, that's about all it takes for me to relax) rather than getting wasted and remaining conscious for only an hour or two.  I've now had the opportunity to reap much of the pleasure of alcohol - being relaxed and socializing more easily - but I have traded those brief moments of being overwhelmed for the benefits of staying in control of my decisions and have extended the experience over hours.

I think the principle carries well into other areas. A relationship that begins with holding hands and quickly progresses to kissing, making out, and more is a relationship that quite simply does not achieve the full potential for enjoyment of physical intimacy. It's not for nothing that God commands sex to be kept within marriage. He knows that in our rush to grasp the greatest momentary pleasures immediately we are in fact cheating ourselves of the totality of the joy of closeness we might otherwise realize if we were to linger upon each moment and hour, first with holding hands and then with hugs and so forth. He also knows that the strength and depth of the relationship has a direct influence on the value of physical intimacy. He knew already what so many of us learn in hindsight - that the brain-fog of physical closeness that grows exponentially thicker as things progress physically also obscures and often renders unimportant the need to learn about the person with whom we are spending our time, and cheapens or overrides the sharing of unique experiences, meals, sights, and sounds that ought to be enjoyed in their own right. A mountaintop view, a three course meal, and a concert are simply not enjoyed properly when a couple is only using each location as another location in which to make out.

We are here in this world for a very short time, and we do well to take it to heart. That knowledge should bring about a yearning in each moment to truly grasp from the smallest experiences the most that we can - not to grasp the most experiences that we can and pile it all into one moment. We are not intended for the flood and drought of excessive consumption in any sense, and we allow ourselves to be so tragically cheated by pretending otherwise. Let us therefore daily consider how to make the most of each blessing, knowing that they will pass. Let us remember that they will pass so that we look forward to eternity where we will no longer grasp two handfuls of wind but rather the glorious everlasting Joy, which is all we've been really striving for in the first place.

....................

Video about a guy who took a year offline 

Also, reference this

What he talks about in the video about the total boredom after quitting the internet sounds a lot like psychological withdrawal symptoms among other addictions.

So, worth considering: Is America now, or soon becoming, entertainment-addicted? (Is everyone? No. Are most people? Probably yes. Also worth realizing: Not thinking you're addicted to something may just mean you're OK with being addicted to it)

Are we so trained to constantly be entertained, distracted, and connected to things going on, that many of us (case in point the younger generation with smartphones) are in fact addicted to the internet/constant entertainment/stimulation?

When I had cable I would sit sometimes for hours at a time channel surfing. Especially after 2am there was almost never anything good on, and yet I kept searching. Surely in 80 channels (only 80, I know) there's SOMETHING! (I *did* get a nice set of knives from an infomercial once)

So now I don't have cable, and I've realized I channel surf Facebook. I keep hitting the home button, scroll down the page to see new comments, check people's profile pages for pictures, all in pursuit of the new, the entertaining, the thought-provoking.

And books, games, other things...all these are boring.

I submit that the modern internet and especially social media is an addictive phenomenon just as is gambling, just as is alcohol and shopping and cable TV and so many other things. I think TV and social media/internet are two of the MOST addictive phenomenons available today. Our brains want more entertainment, more good things, more stimulation. With all this stimulation, we cease to see less active pursuits such as reading, which takes longer to present new things to our brain, as being exciting.

I know this: Beyond the borders of utter boredom lies a powerful need for productiveness. So, I'm going to explore a complete absence of electronics. I'll post my last pictures of Minecraft to Facebook later today, and then I'm off. My phone number is on my facebook page. My email address is  Kevinmbratcher@hotmail.com.
I'm not deleting Facebook, I'm just ignoring it.

Quietly.

No facebook announcement, just a couple of videos posted and anyone who may have heard of this blog at some  point may read this and know. I have found that publicly announcing a plan is one of the surest ways to avoid following through with it, because the peer reward is gained before the required ensuing work.

The first couple weeks are going to be mind-numbing. But on the other side I know the minutes and hours will become full of good things, because I can't stand to sit still.

It's time to totally reduce the comfortability-inducing aspects of my life, to see where being uncomfortable can carry me.

And maybe, occasionally, I'll type something and post it up here. :)

Forgive us our debts... as we ought to have forgiven our debtors?

"Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors"

When you really think about it, this is a scary line to pray (well OK, most of the prayer is, when you really dig into it) If God actually forgave us as much as we forgave our debtors - those who sin against us - then we're all in a lot of trouble.

I've been thinking on forgiveness a lot recently. I think we tend to refuse to forgive others to the extent that we are oblivious (and usually intentionally so) of our sinfulness. And vice versa. Find a former drug/alcohol/anything addict - someone who conquered (via God's grace) that addiction. You'll be hard-pressed to find people more forgiving and easygoing and open than them. They know very well how much sin they've boiled in for years. Their eyes are often quite open to the wrath averted. Unrepentant sinners and those born without, or with "less" sin, have a much harder time with grace and forgiveness.

Suppose Bob stole thousands of dollars and ruined someone's life (or owed the equivalent of billions, to borrow a parable). Suppose when he was caught and came before his accuser, he was told that he had been forgiven it. One would think Bob would be extremely relieved. He would realize the sheer weight of punishment that he was just spared. And if he really, truly realized his sinfulness in stealing, and really was sorry, and really realized the judgment he avoided in being forgiven...he would be more forgiving and more gracious and more willing to show love when people sin against him.

Suppose however that Bob goes to a friend who called him a name, or punched him in anger. Let's up the stakes: Suppose Bob refuses to forgive or talk to or have anything directly or indirectly or by hearsay to do with someone who had not even sinned against him, but had sinned against someone he knew. Let’s make it even crazier: suppose that someone wronged his friend years ago, and has repented, been forgiven by God, and lived an upright life since and is striving to be a good Christian as are we all. Can Bob pray that night, "Forgive me my debts, as I have forgiven my debtors?"

Is he willing to risk that?

It is my honest and personal opinion that we are only unwilling to forgive others their sins when we're blithely ignorant of our own. Mind you, blithe ignorance of sins is one of Satan's favorite ways to mislead us, and we all prefer to ignore our evilness, so it's not like I'm laying insults or making a larger deal out of this than I ought to. What I say is what I have observed in myself, from both sides: either being very ready to forgive, or being very reticent. As my knowledge of my guilt and sinfulness and the relief of forgiveness is; so is my forgiveness of others.

The point, plainly spoken, is this. We are all utterly, totally sinful. There is not a day in which we don't heap new mountains upon the pile. And yet, we are forgiven. It has been wiped clean in Christ - we have been made new. We have been washed clean so that we are whiter than snow. The old man is gone, and by the grace of God we are putting the new man on.

Who are we to NOT forgive another man's sin?

Virtually friends

I came across this video a couple of months ago, and have watched it many times since. A lot of what this video said connected with me, and apart from the whole humans-monkeys comparison thing which tells us more than enough about underlying assumptions, I agree with the assessment.

An interaction with some of the video, then:

Quote: “Texting, emails, posting…all of these things allow us to present the self as we want it to be. We get to edit, and that means we get to delete. Instead of building true friendships, we’re obsessed with endless personal promotion, investing hours on end building our personal profile, pursuing the optimal order of words in our next message…all of which is meant to serve as a desirable image of who we are.”

And therefore to the degree that each of us is aware of this self-promotional imaging we will be unwilling to trust the presented image of others we engage with in the same space (no trust among thieves, so to speak). We do not open ourselves up to others vulnerably and do not expect that they do either, and so we do not ever actually connect with them in the meaningful, dangerous way that is real conversation. This is why for instance asking someone out in a setting that is not face-to-face is less meaningful. A personal message conveyed in the personal setting bears greater personal risk – and therefore carries with it greater value.

To take this from a different approach: Perfect people creep me out. If someone is always extremely bubbly and joyful and their words drip rainbows and diamonds…I assume they’re lying. While this is probably not a healthy point of view, I’d imagine it is a common one. Even with this there are exceptions of course – I am automatically drawn to someone who is joyful, artistically expressive of inner happiness, earnestly happy - but even then I’d expect them to have tears for sad things and anger for evil. No one should be always happy, because this world is not yet a perfectly happy place, and so the social presentation of such tells me that person is not opening his or herself to others, and therefore cannot be trusted to be open to at least on some of the deeper levels.

We are meant to make mistakes, and others are meant to observe them – and hold us accountable for fixing the sinful ones. The good ones recognize their own mistakes as well and are willing to forgive ours. True meaningful bonds are formed in this way. Our personal character traits may come off as odd to others, and while they shouldn’t be angering to others, they may be foreign enough that we won’t be close friends. But in the virtual space, two completely different people who might not stand each other in real life apart from basic acknowledgement can pretend to be perfect for each other, or the best of friends. All this in the pursuit of relationships, and the fear of being lonely.

I think this is also a great risk for long distance relationships and friendships. While both can last for months and even years, I do not think they will if the understanding is that they will remain digitalized and distant. Our deeper vulnerability and connection requires in-person conversation and experiences. Even between those who have shared real conversation and experiences and vulnerability there will still be a manufacturing and a marketing element to the digital conversation. This may be part of why handwritten letters are more valued than emails – apart from the extra required effort, it’s harder to market yourself when editing either means a very obvious scribble, or scrapping your letter when 2/3 of the page is written already. In addition, this is why talking on the phone or, better, on Skype, is favored over texting and emails. In essence, any time you have the chance to type something, there’s a chance that it’s been combed over, inspected, and told to improve its posture. Case in point, if I had spoken this article from my mouth, it would have far more tangents, nervous laughter, and be less cohesive than I hope it is currently.

Another quote I liked from the video: “We slip into thinking that always being connected is going to make us feel…less alone.”

This draws me to recall my first year at Redeemer, when I met and probably at some point talked with dozens of people. At first I felt as though I was finally getting friends again, and rejoining the social world. However, as I reached the end of first year it occurred to me that I still had a very large hole in terms of friends. I had many acquaintances, but very few people I could call friends, and certainly no best friends (those I wouldn’t really be able to claim until 4^th year).

Part of the reason that I did not have deeper friendships was that I did not really know how (still working on that in some respects). Another reason was that part of me did not want to. Close friendships are dangerous, because people can reject, and cause pain. In a world that is increasingly oblivious to what real close friendships are (for many other reasons beyond just social media) it’s hard to find people who will open up to you and provide a situation in which you can open up to them. In the teenage years, it’s nigh on impossible.

Side note: I think this is a part of why so many teenagers pursue alcohol; apart from the highs it offers, and the rebellion factor, it also allows an easy entryway into social conversation. However, like with social media, a connection via alcohol or drugs is not the same as a genuine lowering of the personal drawbridge. Either the bottle stays open forever, or the connection ends (which may explain why some people spend decades with open bottles). Mind you, alcohol can be a decent temporary bridge but it makes a poor permanent one.

When I did make some solid friends toward the end of my college years, it was because we had had conversations with each other, taken the risk of mistakes, and survived those that came.

In the end, what it comes down to is a willingness to open up - to even perhaps abandon the largely false connections that are Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and various other platforms, and to seek out the game nights, local diners, and hospitable tables of others where we may share experiences, food, and conversation, accepting that stupid things will be said and that that – along with apologies and forgiveness – is a part of being human and fallen. I still believe that it is possible to be open in the virtual world (and I’m not just saying this because someone will claim to be the exception). No matter how genuine you may be, however, most will not believe that you are. You will not fully connect. That is only fully realizable in the dangerous and potential-filled real world. 

If Shakespeare lived during Noshavember :)

To shave, or not to shave? That is Noshavember's question...

Whether 'tis nobler in the cold to buffer

With brittle whiskers the winter's cold

Or to take blades against a beard and mustache

And by much scraping, trim them. To shave, to sweep --

No more -- and like a sheep this cold to fend

The cold's ache planned by frigid natural shocks

That earth is heir to. 'Tis a consternation

I surely wouldn't miss. To fly, to flee --

To flee -- from nasty cuts; ah! There's the band-aid.

Yet then to flee from cold - what whiskers come!

Though we have scuttled half the morning's toil

We must take pause. There’s the respect
That makes a mockery of bearded life.
For who would bear the quips and jokes of time,
Th’oppressive throng, the young men, youthfully
Their pains for chin-based hairs, met with dismay,
Their insolence so offered, and their burns
A patient man of worthy age must take
When he himself might his mustache make
In a few mornings. Who would model theirs
In front…yet fret under those jealous eyes
But that the dread of freezing unto death
In open, windy country, where the mourn
Of travelers is heard, through cold distilled,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to southern countries we know not of?
Thus, coldness does make hairiness the call
And thus the native hairs of resolution
Are prickly o’er the pale skin of my face
This enterprise of great growth per moment
Takes all regard for currents turning frigid
And loses them -- with attraction – Yet we’re now
The warmer – winter, on the horizons
Be ne’er its cold remembered.