If you are not too long...

...I will wait here for you all my life. -Oscar Wilde

[source]

Today an episode of Futurama made me cry. I thought that I was just being extra sensitive lately (yesterday I burst into tears five separate times) but in fact that was not necessarily the case today, as I am about to prove. I wanted to find a picture for this post, and when I began my search I was surprised how much Google Instant filled in for me; I clearly wasn’t the first to look for it. I came across the episode’s Wikipedia page and saw that a critic described the ending as, “one of the saddest endings to a television program that I have ever seen.” A TV critic. I’d assume this man has seen his fair share of television programs, and of sad endings. So that made me feel better, but what really clinched it was the enormous amount of commenters on some site (and also below the youtube video) talking about how this made them cry, even though many of them said they weren’t the crying type, or hadn’t cried in five years or whatever. So in this particular case, it’s definitely not just me.

SPOILER ALERT, I’m going to ruin this 2002 episode of Futurama. I don’t feel that bad about it because the rest of the episode wasn’t that great (my overall personal take on this show is that it’s very hit or miss, but mostly miss) and it’s not like you were planning to see it anyway.

So, for necessary background, the character Fry was living in New York in 1999 when on New Year’s Eve of that year he accidentally fell into a thing (a freezer? A time machine? Who cares) that sent him to the year 3000, where he made new friends, etc. Life in the year 3000 is the show’s basic premise. In this particular episode (it’s called “Jurassic Bark”—very classy) Fry and his self-centered robot best friend visit a museum exhibit that happens to be of the pizza place where Fry was working in 1999. They see a few artifacts Fry recognizes, and then a gray dog-shaped fossil. Fry gasps when he realizes who this is: his loyal dog, Seymour, who was his best friend at the time he was suddenly sent to the future with no warning. Through flashbacks you see how close the two of them were. Examples: after rescuing the dog from starvation, Fry says something like, "you're nice, you don't judge me like other dogs do," (my translation from French) and they have a song they sing/bark together.

Bref, I mean, anyway, Fry's doctor friend says he can clone the dog, and that they can even restore his personality, and even his memory to the moment that he died. Fry is SO excited about this idea and buys his dog a collar and a bed and everything in preparation. The robot gets jealous of the attention (and the collar) and throws the fossil in lava, but then rescues it, this just serves to heighten the suspense, and then the moment of truth arrives and they begin the cloning process. First they see that Seymour was age 15 when he died. When Fry sees this, he decides not to go through with it, reasoning that he knew Seymour when he was three, so the dog had had 12 years to move on, find a different master, live a full life. He says, "surely he's forgotten all about me." This is sort of a touching/selfless idea, and who would want to be resurrected old?

It seems like the end of the episode. But then there's one more flashback. Seymour never moved on at all. He sat outside the pizza place every day for twelve years, in all kinds of weather, a fact made most poignant when you see the pizza chef grow old, with white hair, and the pizza place close and get boarded up. He waited for Fry for the rest of his life at the place they last saw each other. Finally Seymour lies down, just once, and closes his eyes and the episode ends. I'm tearing up just typing about it. (It's very findable on youtube but I don't think it would be as good without the more detailed backstory provided by the episode).

I think the idea that really got me was that after all, Seymour would have LOVED to see Fry. Even if it were just for a little while before he would die again, even just one moment. That would have made his life complete in a sense. Yet Fry didn't give him this chance because he was trying to be nice, because he didn't know any better.

When I (and/or others) have a really strong emotional reaction to something, I try to find some sort of way that the emotion-triggering-thing can relate to universal ideas, and/or to God.

In my opinion, a surefire trigger (if done well, of course) is this idea of two ships passing. Sometimes it's two people who physically occupy the same space, but in Grey's Anatomy and The Golden Compass it can also be people who are in a physical space that overlaps but that is spiritually a different/alternate dimension and thus at least one of the people has no way to see, hear, or feel the other person, though they might somehow sense their presence, a little, for a moment.

"All day long I have held out my hands to an obstinate people," -Isaiah 65:2a

I don't see God as a stray dog who waits for us outside a pizza place. Honest, I don't. But if this animated rescued-stray dog's 12 year waiting made me cry, then how much more powerful is it when God waits for us? Waits for we who were created to wait on him. He waits with open arms for his children to turn to him, and many of them never sense this. They never see that in their very own universe (not even an alternate one!) Someone holds out their hands, hoping for a response. I don't have an extremely clear picture of my theological beliefs in this area as regards every human who has ever lived, but I will say confidently that, at least some of the time, God waits for us, eager to share life with us. And his patience and forbearance are beyond all measurement or compare.

If we only knew how attentive God is towards us, even when we do not sense him at all. If we only saw all the ways he blesses us that we're not even aware of. "The Lord longs to be gracious to you; he rises to show you compassion. For the Lord is a God of justice. Blessed are all who wait for him!" (Isaiah 30:18)

I think these words are at the heart of the emotion for me: "If you only knew!" Someone could be praying for you right now, asking God for exactly that thing you need. You could be showing hospitality to an angel (Hebrews 13:2, lol). You could be days away from your next big break. Someone could be writing you a letter, or something could already be in the mail for you. Someone across the world, your next best friend, could be making the decision about what they'll do next in life, that will bring them into your neighborhood.

A closing thought. At prayer meeting tonight, our pastor mentioned that reading the Bible all the way through is something that should be completed by at least 1-3 years after someone gives their life to Christ. He's right, and I am not in any way denying that. But 1-3 years? How patient God is. I think the length of the Bible shows it as much as anything. God doesn't expect us to read the entire Bible in one day. Nor does he ask us to panic about it if we haven't finished yet. It's not about being finished reading the Bible, it's about reading the Bible every day. God just doesn't see time as we do: "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but wanting everyone to come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:8-9)

God, thank you for allowing me to glimpse your truth and the beauty of faithfulness today through a scruffy cartoon dog.

Women's Bodies and 2nd-Best Friends: paradigms change your life, yo

I think a great deal of my angst comes from my chronic tendency to see things in black and white. This means, for example, that for a long time I assumed that participating in things meant I should be the best at them, and if I would not be the best, I was failing and it wasn't necessarily worth it to continue in what I was doing. A nice thing about improv is that it's so thoroughly a team sport that this way of thinking about it doesn't make any sense. I am more than lucky (I call it providence) that that was my main college "sport."

But now I believe the only thing I should aim to be the best at is being myself. Frankly, I don't have the self-discipline to be the best at singing or ice-skating or graphic design, though I like two of those things. There is no such thing as a best writer, because everyone's style is so different, though admittedly writing seems like a weird thing to do when you consider that everyone who is literate is capable of it, and there are thousands (more, even) of very talented writers out there doing their thing. Does the world need another one? Well, no and yes. No other writer is me. Thus no other writer has been and lived in all the exact combination of places I have physically and emotionally. And no one else has my mind. If writing was purely for entertainment value, well, no one will ever run out of things to read in their lifetime, so I'm adding to the noise. But if writing is to share viewpoints in a world where literally no two people have the same one, then it's not a useless pursuit.

This is meant to illustrate the importance of paradigms. I will take two personal examples to show how a correct vision of something can bring peace of mind, perhaps even joy, though the situation has not changed in any other way.

When I was, oh, I don't know what age(s) exactly, an adolescent, my body changed from that of a child to that of an adult. Pretty cool, huh. The thing was, though, that for years I didn't understand what a woman's body should look like. Or I will rephrase, the shape a woman's body normally has, on average. I never thought about it at all, and then when my body started looking different, I suddenly cared. But I was all wrong. I cannot imagine where I got all my warped views, but I thought the waist was located at the hips, and that it was supposed to be so small you could almost span it with your hands. I thought that thighs were to be completely straight with no roundness to them. I looked at my body and thought, "What the heck is going on here?! Why do I look like this?" I hated the tops of my little legs for each having one long curve down the front of them, because I thought that roundness was an indicator of fatness, and I didn't want to be fat. In retrospect, I guess most of the women I'd seen were curveless models, broken up by the occasional Disney princess. In fact, I'm sure that if I had tried to draw my mental image of what women look like (a combination of those two), it wouldn't have made any sense and I would have more quickly discovered my error. As it was, I don't remember how or when I was put right. I think I read something somewhere that jolted me out of my preconceptions. After this, I do remember noticing the hourglass shape on basically all women, once I started to look for it, and being surprised every time that we all look like that! But when I finally got it, I stopped being bewildered, confused, and vaguely resentful of my body. My body hadn't changed, but when my perspective finally did, it changed everything.

These are the waists I grew up seeing (the words I could take or leave, they're funny but not essential):

[source]

My second example is shorter, and I'm keeping it vague. Basically, I often get jealous of other peoples' friendships. I make progress in this area, then regress again, and I don't know where I'm at with it now. But recently I had the idea that perhaps, just perhaps, I am not meant to be best friends with a particular one of my dearest friends. Maybe God chose before the foundations of the world that I would only be her 2nd or 3rd best friend. This changed everything for me. If this is the case, I don't have to waste one more second wishing I were different, or competing with (any) other girl (or guy). I can be exactly myself, and love my friend in a specific way, without constantly measuring the strength or closeness of our friendship against any other. I can stop keeping score and just do my thing. I don't have to be best friends with all my friends.

This is what I think life is about: we can stop keeping score and just do our thing. [Warning: the rest of this paragraph is repetitive.] God has put us in a position where our task is to love him the way only we can love him. At onething the year I went, 25,000 people sang a song together (to God, obviously): "No one else can love you like I love you, Lord, cause I was made unique in your heart, I was made to bring you joy." The first many times I tried to sing this, even in the privacy of my room, I cried. It's true, though.* No one can love God the father like I love him. No one can love Jesus like I love him. No one can love and honor the Holy Spirit like I love him. If I were missing, if my voice weren't here, speaking, something would be missing. I was meant to be here, and to love him. I was made unique, and my function was, and is, and always will be, to be me. No one is better at that than me. Others might be better at golf, or writing, or speaking French or German, or small talk, they might date or marry sweet people that I would not have said no to, they might even be better friends with friends I love, but no one can take my place. And God does not, will never, love them more than he loves me, no matter what goes down (or up) in our respective lives.

I want everyone to know that this is true of them, too. I will put it in the second person, to this end. God made you to be you. No one can be better at your primary task in life, which is to glorify God using your unique gifts. No matter what others have that you don't, be it adventures or money or relationships, they have not taken it out of your pocket, because you're not competing with them. You're not even to be compared to them. God sees to it that you have enough of the right things for you, for now. You are never short-changed if Jesus is your king; you can't be. He doesn't make mistakes, and he's an abundant giver.

Viewing life through any other lens (as I admit to doing like 90% of the time) brings anxiety, jealousy, perhaps self-disgust, sometimes fear, sometimes confusion, sometimes even shame. And this, my friends, is why I think healthy paradigms are essential.

-
*Also the melody is charming and somehow lends itself to tears with all its high jumps.

Too Good to be True: You're Not Breaking the Law

[source]

I know some people think The Shack (the book by William P. Young, not the shack pictured above) has dangerously false ideas in it. Maybe it does. But I think most or maybe all books can contain truths that set people free if handled/interpreted properly, or harm people if misused. I have no doubt that a Spirit-filled, Spirit-led person reading The Shack would be more blessed than harmed by its contents. I recommend this book highly to everyone with the caution that some of it is cheesily and badly written, but the best parts more than make up for the worst.

In The Shack one of the members of the Trinity (I forget which, beautifully, in this case I don't think it matters) says, “The Law that once contained impossible demands—‘Thou shall not…’—actually becomes a promise we fulfill in you.” This was a transformative thing for me to read. In this case, that means I haven't forgotten or gotten sick of the idea, even many months later, and I continue to find new applications for it. A few Scriptures jump out to me as lining up with this idea. Romans 12:1-2 exhorts us “Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.” It doesn’t say, “transform yourself,” but “be transformed,” and we as are also incapable of renewing our own minds, that clause, too, puts us in the being-acted-upon category rather than that of the agent: promises are fulfilled in us.

I’ll make a plug here for an idea I heard long ago at Hillsong London and then again briefly at my prayer meeting in St. Claude Thursday night. This is important. What is God's will? How can one discern it? How can you make choices that line up with his will? Good news, pastors say, it's simple: God’s will is always for you to live in such close relationship with him that you can’t help but do good, whether you realize it or not. It might not matter where you live, for example, as long as while you are there you are walking hand in hand with God, seeking him, trusting him, listening for his voice and heeding it when it comes. Same for what job you pick, and maybe other things too. So discerning God’s will might not be hearing your five-year-plan from him one particularly intense prayer night and jotting it down so you can hit all the highlights as they come up. His good, pleasing, and perfect will is for you to love him with all you have, and to love your neighbor, and put their needs on at least equal footing with your own, if not putting them first, depending on the verse you’re currently meditating on. :o) You can start doing this with whoever you interact with next. God’s will. What a blessing to be inside it. How great that you can be there the second you turn to him in faith and pursue him.

All of Romans chapter 8 is a delight to read. I’ll put just a few verses here (though there are more along these same lines) for brevity’s sake. “…And so [God] condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what the nature desires, but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace. […] You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you.” (Romans 8:3b-9a)

I mean, this is neat. If you say Jesus is Lord and mean it--as opposed to saying it just to say it or because you’ve heard other people say it--the Spirit of God is in you (because "no one can say 'Jesus is Lord,' except by the Holy Spirit" 1 Corinthians 12:3b). So if you believe Jesus is Lord, then you are controlled by the Spirit and not the sinful nature. And if that is the case, then simply by living you are fulfilling the demands of the law rather than breaking it. And the demands of the law are totally impossible for humans to keep, so this is the sort of thing that is too good to be true, but is found within God’s promises and is thus still somehow true.

God-wrestler

I think the first time I learned and retained that "Israel" means "God-wrestler" (I've also heard: "he struggles with God") was my senior year of college. I really didn't like it. I complained to Jeremy at the train station (because I learned the weekend of improv regionals) that God and Israel are supposed to be spouses! Not wrestle each other. Yucky. I hate wrestling. (I do struggle with God sometimes, but again, that doesn't sound like a good thing.)

When I was reading Prayer by Philip Yancey he said some of the people in the Bible who were most richly rewarded were those who bargained with God and got in His face about stuff. God frequently is petitioned and shows even more mercy than He was going to. Yancey (paraphrase) writes that He likes when we ask because it can unleash more mercy on earth. Obviously I can see how this is so in the case of Abraham asking to spare those cities if fewer and fewer righteous people can be found (Genesis 18:16-33 if you forgot). Yancey asks: "Abraham stopped asking; would God have spared the cities for just one person?" Also there's that story in Luke 18:1-8 about the widow who won't stop bothering the judge until he gives her the justice she asks for. My TNIV Luke 18:1 says "Jesus told [this] parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up." And there are plenty of others in the Bible too.

Yancey also mentions his relationships with the people closest to him in life, like his brother, his wife, and his editor. About them he says "with each of these people, my intimate partners, I act in a way reminiscent of the bargaining scenes with God. I make suggestions, back off, accommodate their point of view, reach a compromise and come away changed."

Obviously I think it's possible to argue/fight/wrestle someone without love, but maybe there's significance in the fact that they can be done with love, too, and it might be a sign of love to be willing to. It can be really really hard to bring up some things with people, and most of us aren't willing to talk about tough stuff with those we don't know too well. Some aren't even willing to bring them up with friends. But like Yancey says, challenge changes us.

There was also a part I read and was disgusted by. Yancey talks about wrestling his brother in the dark when they were both little kids. And I am paraphrasing this, but he said it was a lot like making love, because you grapple back and forth, using up your energy against each other, body on body, then fall back, spent. I was like, "hello, incest!" but the image has stuck with me for months now. Perhaps because he's right that wrestling indicates a certain closeness. That's why it's far more blessed to wrestle with God than to simply be far away from Him. Sometimes literally.. Jacob receives God's blessing (after having to ask for it) when the wrestling is over in Genesis 32:26-29.

Maybe this is part of the key to the spousal relationship between Israel and God. Maybe a marriage is a promise to keep wrestling and not just peace out when hard stuff comes up, because something of deep value is gained through the back-and-forth of an honest, loving challenge. And maybe that something is the experience of turning into the strong and selfless person you were created to be in the arms of the one you love best.

Songs I love but can't agree with, part one

[One of my favorite things is responding to songs as though they were one half of a conversation. I'm a little self-conscious because I know dumb pop songs are just dumb pop songs and supposedly they only pick the words because they rhyme. Maybe they are not meant to be taken that seriously. Nevertheless, I love this and am thus doing it anyway.]

Recently on a blog I keep up with there was a post called "I've been using music to amplify my toxic emotions." I got really excited when I saw the title, because I was like, "I think I do that too!" Unfortunately the post didn't live up to my expectations. I thought it was too general. And the author's way of using music isn't exactly the same as mine. But it probably doesn't matter whether we had the exact same emotions, or what songs overlapped with our negative emotions. I'm sure the outcome is quite similar, and unfortunately the solution too. What worked for her was wiping her iPod and starting from scratch with only music that creates positive thoughts. Ouch. I'll have to keep that idea on the back burner for a while until I can handle considering it. In the meantime, I am happy, delighted even, to critique songs I love (for the way they sound, and also in a guilty-pleasure-improv-character sort of way) but just cannot agree with.

Katy Perry has a place in my heart, even though I just deleted "I Kissed a Girl" from my iPod and iTunes because I realized how dumb that song is and how I am never just like, "man I want to listen to that song." The lyrics, even with gender aside, are all about kissing someone you don't even know, and that idea has honestly never appealed to me. (Also in this case they're drunk, which, if possible, makes it an even less inviting idea.) I was really sad when I learned that that awesome old black-and-white picture of a man dipping a woman into a kiss was between strangers. It no longer seemed as charming to me. So "I Kissed a Girl" was relatively easy to part with. I don't love it or agree with it.

But "The One That Got Away" is another story. It's super catchy. Sure the first verse is full of rascally behavior, but I consider high school to be distant enough past that it doesn't really matter. Well, tattoos are for life, but, moving on.. The chorus begins, "In another life/ I would be your girl/ we'd keep all our promises, it'd be us against the world." I can't argue with the factual nature of this, because it's another life so anything could happen, but I do think that this is sort of a dumb thing to think about, especially for this type of thing. We're not in another life, and continuing to repeat this particular speculation is more likely to hurt than to help anything, emotionally speaking.

The next part I have more of a problem with: "In another life/I would make you stay." I hate this line. You can't make someone stay, and if you could you wouldn't want to. This is like the whole epitome of why sin is possible and why the world is so f'ed up. God values free will highly enough that he allows us to make choices that hurt people, and hurt him. He invites us into love and freedom, but doesn't force it. Love is the opposite of making someone do something.

I am about to quote The Shack. Prepare your heart. In The Shack, Jesus says, "To force my will on you is exactly what love does not do. Genuine relationships are marked by submission even when your choices are not helpful or healthy." Thank you, Shack Jesus! Can you tell Katy Perry this, please?

Further, Jesus breaks all the locks and all the chains that bind us. This is something we cannot do, so this is always "his part." But we have a part, too. We have to walk out of the now-unlocked cages by ourselves. We have to stand up and dance until the chains fall off. If we can't do it right away, he waits. Super patiently. His arms are always open and they never get tired. But we have a choice to make that he can't and won't make for us. It's a partnership in this sense. [Oh, you want a concrete example of chains? He conquers the sin that other people have committed against us, breaking the hold it has on us, freeing us to forgive by his own victory and forgiveness. But we choose to forgive. He won't make us, and we yet we won't be free until we do forgive.] I say all this to emphasize that even Jesus doesn't make you stay (/make you do anything, technically). So it's stupid for anyone else to aspire to this. (Particularly if the only reason you give for this is "So I don't have to say you were the one that got away," which isn't even grammatically correct).

So Katy, or whoever actually wrote this song, in another life, you would not make him stay. You shouldn't want to. You should want him to be free, and happy. You can want him to pick you, but if he doesn't, he's not your man and you should respect that for both of your sakes.

I keep thinking of Terri or whatever Mr. Schuester's wife's name is in the first season of Glee. SPOILER ALERT.. for the first season, lol... she fakes a pregnancy to get him to stay with her selfish self. And guess what he does the second he learns the truth? That's right, he leaves. And he doesn't come back (at least not as far as I am in Glee, which isn't far, but I don't think he's planning on it, either). The things we could do to make people stay are not worth it. Honest, honest. And it doesn't work, usually. You can make someone stay physically without keeping them emotionally engaged. In fact, this is a likely outcome if you force someone to stay.

Back to "The One That Got Away." There's another verse, sort of clever but fluffy at the same time. Then she sings towards the end, "I should have told you what you meant to me," and this, I can get behind. This, rather than making someone stay, is actually a good thing to do a lot of the time. Then the other person can decide what they'll do about it, as a free being. So, ultimately she hits on a good idea. But she doesn't stick with it. She goes right back to that chorus. Twice.

All or Nothing, revisited / Empty Space

Something has been bothering me for months, and sitting here today I finally realized what it was. I had been turning around and around in my mind the idea of "either things matter, or they don't."

What I meant by that was either our actions and our sins have consequences and eternal weight, or they do not. It's obvious that our sins do have consequences even if we are forgiven of them (example: a baby that results from adultery, which is also an eternal result). It's obvious that even if Jesus forgives you for making all the wrong choices, you still made them.

I was having trouble finding some idea to hold on to to sort of anchor my thoughts.. I felt like I was thrashing around and never colliding with anything substantial as I tried to make sense of how it was possible for grace to exist, and what it could mean, because if it doesn't wipe away the sin completely, then what does it really do? By the magic of external processing, I have just realized that I think an action is categorized as a sin (or not a sin) based on our attitude toward God as we do it (with some sort of exception for mental illness, I guess?), and that alone. Thus grace restores our relationship to God (again and again and again). That's what it does. Because we can't do that on our own.

Acting against what you know to be right, or against what you feel God's telling you, is sin, whereas the same action performed by someone else might not be a sin. And we could be hurt by an action that was not a sin, if someone has good intentions for us. Like if you were allergic to penicillin (spelled that right on the first try, nbd) and someone administered it to you in some sort of medical situation that requires penicillin, thinking it would save your life, but the result was you got much worse and were in much more pain, that's completely different than someone who knows you're allergic and wants to hurt you.

So the reason something is a sin is because it ruptures your relationship with God somehow. It could be you making your own choice despite what you believe God wants for you, thereby supplanting him as ruler of your life and know-er of all that is right (knowledge of good and evil?). In fact maybe that's all it ever is, but it just takes different forms. That's not a very original idea, I admit.

What does this all have to do with my revelation? I think most people, and most especially people my age, are looking for meaning in their lives, for some evidence that whatever we're doing isn't a waste. Either it's a waste, and we should change something, or it isn't a waste, and it's okay to keep many things the same. Either we have time to try harder later, or we are scorning God's gift by not trying hard now. All or nothing.

Living in France is neat, and one reason I like it is because the first thing that jumps to mind isn't "waste of time," when I think of "spending a year after college working in France." But really, just as atoms are mostly empty space, and outer space is mostly empty space, and lots of things in between* are mostly empty space with a few significant little pieces that give the rest meaning and identity, my life here has a lot of "empty space" between moments of importance or significance. Because I work about ten hours a week, and have between 2 and 3 "church things" a week, and the rest is up in the air and can be settled any which way.

So I find myself thinking, "oh, if I am wasting time here, Jesus will forgive me," and then I think, "but wasting time is squandering my brief existence on earth" and then I think, "I love being in my room! The only thing I don't love about it is this fear that I'm wasting time." Then I look at some blogs of women who put up 5-7 pictures of themselves in different outfits posing in different ways every few days, with the designer or store where they got each article of clothing neatly and perhaps painstakingly typed up beneath, and I think "what a waste of time, but also I'm jealous because so many strangers are complimenting their style" and THEN I think, "if what they are doing is a waste of time, then what do you call what I am doing reading these blogs?"

In short, I tried to look at my status as a child of God for confirmation that I am not wasting my time. It didn't work. Because I guess deep down I think things matter. But then, is that being blasphemous? Aka, am I really okay with coming to a conclusion that leaves me feeling sort of ashamed because frankly I can't see myself giving any more effort at this particular moment of my life without it becoming direct, unmitigated legalism? I can only be assured of not wasting my time on a macro level. I can be sure that good works are being done through me (I generally consider Jesus' commands to us to be promises fulfilled by the Spirit in us, a la The Shack), and that God has me here for a reason, which I occasionally glimpse, but the amount I realize his reasoning has no bearing on how good of a reason it is.

But I was not convinced that I am not wasting my time. I thought about what I would be doing if I lived in America instead. In my imagination that, too, was mostly empty space, because summers between school years growing up had their camps and stuff but were largely empty space. School leaves less room for empty space, because if you're in school you probably have friends there who you'll hang out with, and extracurricular activities that take up enough of your time that you don't have as much space to wonder if your life has meaning, and at any rate at the end you have a degree or something. But school is over for now. And even when I worked 35 hours a week last summer, the job I was at was definitely mostly empty space. I sat at a desk for 7-8 hour shifts and staved off the boredom the best I could, then came home to no homework.

Then that one guy made that youtube video about Jesus versus religion and I read a response to it that pointed out that Jesus was, in fact, sort of a fan of rules when he said (John 14:21a paraphrased) "If you love me, follow my commandments." And I said, "Am I really following those commandments? Most of the time I am not interacting with other people, in fact I have been known to sometimes avoid opportunities to interact with them when I am sure that interaction will not be fun or manifestly fruitful." But I am consciously following some of the commandments, some of the time. Here, too, is mostly empty space.

What I realized today was not an answer to my question "so, do things matter or not?", but I realized why I was asking: I was asking because by any reasonable standard, my life right now is a giant waste of time. The internet is full of well-meaning people telling you to seize the day, every day, and to get off the couch. Well, my couch is in a room that doesn't get internet, so often I don't even have the benefit of being on the couch. I am a step down from wasting my life sitting on my couch- I am wasting (most of) my life sitting in bed. -100 points. People say be creative and follow your dreams, that it's always worth it. I believe those people. But I don't even know what my dreams are.

Part of me thinks if we could just find contentment where we are, we would have defeated Satan for good, and the other part of me thinks that's exactly what Satan would want, so that we'll stop reaching higher and eventually just remain exactly where we are, getting too fat to be healthy. This clearly demonstrates the problem of having such a black and white mind as the one that animates my body.

I conclude that we should "just give our best and the rest will come," (thank you Sleeping at Last, this is the second time I have quoted this exact line on this blog) and grace will cover all the other things, but I don't know what my best is, or how to give it. That's life, huh?

[Hahaha this sounds like such an emo rant, but I promise it's not. I feel very even-tempered as I write this, perhaps even peaceful. I know I make myself sound bad and/or boring, but I'm not very afraid of that. I guess because I believe I can't be the only one with these questions. Also, though I guess I believe deep down that things matter, I know I also believe that everything will be okay.]


-
*My "in-between" example is a city, especially if you think of it as including the airspace above it and the earth below it. Only the things at about ground-level, which take up a relatively small chunk, determine what city it is.

God doesn't expect us to be good

I think it's self-evident that humanity is inherently evil, but if you are not convinced, here is a Dino Comic as evidence:

Now that that's established, I want to respond to some thoughts I heard in a class lecture by some dude named Bob Hamp.* By respond I mostly mean summarize so you don't have to listen to all hour and twenty minutes of it, and maybe add a few of my ideas.

To set the stage for his message, he refers to Scripture that comes soon after John 3:16. He uses the NASB, which might be why I had never heard it put this way before. He asks his class to fill in the blank in this: ²⁰ For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. ²¹ But he who practices _______ comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

"He who does evil hates the light [...] but he who practices ______ comes to the light."

What should go in the blank? a) truth  b) good  c) righteousness

Me, I said good.

I fell into his trap.

The correct answer is "he who practices the truth comes to the light." Mr. Hamp (I don't even know this guy, I feel weird using his name) says that in human economy, the opposite of evil is good, but in God's economy, the opposite of evil is truth.

Thus, he continues, when God tells us our righteousness is like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6), he's not saying it to make us feel crummy, but to give us a realistic diagnosis so he can give us a realistic course of treatment.

He points out that when someone says they are a good person, they are only comparing themself within the human race, like "not as bad as Hitler, not as good as Mother Teresa," but since all humanity is sinful, it's nothing to be proud of even to come out at the very top of that spectrum. And, he concludes, if there's no good in you, and you try to do good, the best you can do is a good version of evil.

Hamp says relatively early on that Scripture doesn't give us a list of rules to follow but a blueprint of how reality functions. Thus, despite our human conclusion that the way to fix evil is to do good, the real solution is not to do good but to come to the light. When we come to the light, God begins to expose what is not him, and reveal what is him, and then life starts to work. What I say about this is that not only does God reveal our hearts at this time, but he actually changes them. I tend to believe that becoming aware of something instantly changes it in all sorts of cases, and I especially think so in this case.

Hamp says what God wants of us isn't that we be good, but that we practice the truth. He says Adam originally didn't have an awareness of good and evil before he ate from the tree, and he goes so far as to say (admitting that it's not supported by Scripture) that Adam even could have done some bad stuff before the fall without knowing it, because he didn't have the Knowledge of Good and Evil, but that it wouldn't matter if he did, because he was living so closely with God.

So once Adam and Eve had sinned, they hid from God, choosing hiddenness over light and truth (hey just like in John 3:20!) Hamp says, "I wish I could go back and tell him, there is no good reason to hide. Hiding is death."

Okay, so basically all of that has been that guy's thoughts. Now for a few of mine. I find it fascinating that I still can fear God's judgment or disapproval even after reading about how he forgives and heals even the deepest and most entrenched and disgusting sins. After reading all the Scripture about how God sees us as beloved children. Yet that fear creeps in, and I admit there are plenty of things about myself I would not want God to know about or see, if I could control it.

But I think maybe the best advice I ever read about making those tough choices about behavior that may or may not be a sin, you're not sure, was this: do not let anything hinder your connection with God. If you don't find yourself able to stop a sin pattern, at least do not add hiding from God to your list of problems. God is not going to be shocked, because he's heard worse, and you can't really hide things anyway, only refuse to discuss them with him. And discussing them with him is the most giant step you can take in the best direction. You can't conquer sin on your own. Trying to suppress your sin nature is like trying to hold a lid down on a pot that wants to boil over. Ouch! And also you're going to fail miserably. To extend this slightly odd metaphor further, God is the one (one as in, only one) that can lower the flame, so ask him about it!

One last thing. I think a few verses in Luke illustrate how God responds to our honest, unhidden hearts, and that moment when we see the truth/see the light.

In Luke 5:4-11 Simon Peter lowers his nets because Jesus tells him to, even though he'd been fishing all night with no success.When two boats are filled with fish, Simon falls to his knees and says, "Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!" Whether or not that seems like a random comment in that context,** I think it reflects our natural response to our sin-- hiding from God, distancing ourselves from him. Instead of crying out, "Go away from us, Lord!" Adam and Eve just hid instead. But Jesus, instead of being like, "Okay Simon, you're right, catch ya later," he says, "Don't be afraid, from now on you will fish for people," or put another way, he entrusts him with a super important task whereby saying, "I want you for my team." He sees the worth in Simon. It was Simon's right view of things that unlocked this response.

So: we can't do good, but what God asks from us instead is for us to come to him and see the truth and live out the truth [live out= acknowledge in all our ways]. Once we do that, God takes care of the goodness. All the goodness is his anyway.

-

*It's a sermon I heard here: http://gatewaypeople.com/ministries/freedom-kairos/media1 almost at the very bottom of the page, it's called "The Hidden Heart." I think it starts mid-sentence and talking about something random, just go with it.

**It does to me. Maybe someday it won't. I love how the Bible can be a gift you keep unwrapping.