[{"content":"","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/certainty/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Certainty","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/doubt/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Doubt","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/objectivity/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Objectivity","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/relativism/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Relativism","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/sketches/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Sketches","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/subjectivity/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Subjectivity","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/truth/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Truth","type":"tags"},{"content":"\u0026ldquo;But you must understand, Jack, that truth is relative\u0026hellip;I hope you know that,\u0026rdquo; said Leo trying to persuade him. \u0026ldquo;I disagree. It never was, and it never will be,\u0026rdquo; retorted Jack. \u0026ldquo;Don\u0026rsquo;t you think that the statement is, by itself, illogical? And to be honest with you, this is an idea I\u0026rsquo;ve come to truly hate.\u0026rdquo; Leo was perplexed. He wasn\u0026rsquo;t sure how to respond to a clearly emotional and negative response to something which he thought to be universally agreed upon.\nI overheard this discussion as soon as I\u0026rsquo;d taken my seat at my favorite spot in this 24/7 coffee shop, only that this time I came late in the evening and there was practically no one left other than these two gentlemen who were plunged deep in discussion. I don\u0026rsquo;t know how they had come to this point in their conversation, but, since the place was so quiet, I could hear them clearly from where I was and, thanks to the overhead light at their table, I could also see their faces. I followed their conversation from a distance.\n\u0026ldquo;How do you mean Jack? There are many other sayings that essentially convey the same thought \u0026ndash; \u0026lsquo;beauty is in the eye of the beholder\u0026rsquo; particularly comes to mind. I could even add the one that says that \u0026lsquo;one man\u0026rsquo;s meat is another man\u0026rsquo;s poison\u0026rsquo;. All these are, arguably, saying the same thing; that truth can be perceived differently depending on the angle from which you\u0026rsquo;re observing. You don\u0026rsquo;t mean to say we\u0026rsquo;re all irrational for adopting these sayings, do you?\u0026rdquo; Leo finally answered, after an awkward pause.\n\u0026ldquo;Sure, I\u0026rsquo;d grant it that a pair of shoes that looks good to me might look ugly to you, but that\u0026rsquo;s not to say that there aren\u0026rsquo;t things that are universally beautiful or ugly. Walking in a room where a mad man just stabbed and killed people is a universally ugly sight. No one in their right mind would call that beautiful. There\u0026rsquo;s no angle from which to look at this horror scene and find beauty!\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Well, if you put it that way\u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;There\u0026rsquo;s certainly something true about the saying,\u0026rdquo; interrupted Jack, \u0026ldquo;but you cannot elevate it into an absolute; that\u0026rsquo;s way out of proportion!\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;I agree, but you have to admit that\u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo; said Leo, before being interrupted again.\n\u0026ldquo;That\u0026rsquo;s, by the way, the reason I hate this idea. The fact that it\u0026rsquo;s framed into something obvious and self-evident thus tricking people into applying it to all sorts of things. Before you know it, a person who would be universally known to be male from ages past gets labeled as a woman depending on how one feels. And also before you know it, texts no longer have meaning, since meaning is created by whoever is interpreting disregarding the context.\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Jack, I think you\u0026rsquo;re taking it a bit too far,\u0026rdquo; said Leo, this time trying to calm him before he got carried away.\n\u0026ldquo;No, I\u0026rsquo;m not,\u0026rdquo; answered Jack, making sure Leo noticed his voice was calm all along, before continuing.\n\u0026ldquo;I\u0026rsquo;m only taking the idea to its logical but unfortunate conclusion. Sadly, because of such thinking, reality is no longer something to which people must conform, but it\u0026rsquo;s become something that can potentially be shaped anyway anyone feels. Reality is much bigger than that, and it does not care about our feelings. The truth is, if you put your hand into the fire long enough, you\u0026rsquo;ll be burned severely, regardless of your philosophical beliefs about what the fire does to your hand.\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;I see how you\u0026rsquo;re connecting this to current debates in our culture, but let\u0026rsquo;s not debate that right now. I\u0026rsquo;ve got to ask though; do you honestly believe the idea of subjective truth brought all this up?\u0026rdquo;\nJack asked, \u0026ldquo;What else could be the origin? This view locates the truth inside an individual rather than it being objectively and distinctly external. Isn\u0026rsquo;t it what brought such (nonsensical) sayings like my truth and your truth?\u0026rdquo;\nJack then paused for a minute and lowered his voice as if to say something very important: \u0026ldquo;Truth is truth whether I\u0026rsquo;m around or not, whether I assent to it or not. Truth is like the sun, it will rise whether any of us ever wake up tomorrow. It\u0026rsquo;s bigger than anyone. It doesn\u0026rsquo;t depend on anyone\u0026rsquo;s perspective; the sun is objectively out there. Likewise, truth can never be \u0026lsquo;mine\u0026rsquo; to possess especially if \u0026lsquo;yours\u0026rsquo; could be different. It wouldn\u0026rsquo;t be truth to begin with.\u0026rdquo;\nLeo then thought he should say what he wanted to say earlier before he got interrupted.\n\u0026ldquo;Okay, but you\u0026rsquo;ve got to admit that people can view things differently based on their backgrounds and contexts. That stands to reason, doesn\u0026rsquo;t it?\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Yes, indeed, people have all sorts of opinions about things. However, those opinions do not thereby become truth because of how they were acquired. The fact that my entire village believes in something doesn\u0026rsquo;t automatically make it \u0026rsquo;truth\u0026rsquo;! Truth is not determined by who holds it or how many hold it.\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Coming back to what brought this all up,\u0026rdquo; Leo quickly said before they got derailed, \u0026ldquo;could you then tell me what makes my belief true? Some things cannot be verified scientifically! What makes your religion more valid than other religions? And you know how religions make wild claims, don\u0026rsquo;t you? They claim to hear from God and know what the future holds. How can any of that be verified? This is why I think it wise to just embrace, in this instance, the fact that truth is relative. Have you ever heard of the parable of the blind men? They were asked to describe an elephant, and since the blind men had never seen one, they came up with different descriptions based on which part of the elephant they briefly touched. Likewise, our religions come to different conclusions and we raise our children to believe what was handed down to us. It\u0026rsquo;s all relative, as different cultures have their own beliefs. That can\u0026rsquo;t be illogical now can it?\u0026rdquo;\nAh, it all started to make sense and I understood at once what brought about this interesting discussion.\nBased on the expression on Jack\u0026rsquo;s face, it seemed that he hadn\u0026rsquo;t been stumped by Leo\u0026rsquo;s question. He did not lose a second to respond: \u0026ldquo;First, even in matters of religion, the saying about subjective truth doesn\u0026rsquo;t apply. Either we, Christians, are right (in which case ours is the truth) or we\u0026rsquo;re wrong (in which case our beliefs cannot and should not be called truth). The contradicting statements from two different religions cannot be simultaneously called \u0026rsquo;truth\u0026rsquo;. If Christians believe Jesus to be the only and rightful Lord of the universe, they believe it the same way we believe in the fact that you\u0026rsquo;ll get burned if you put your hand in the fire. The time will come when, so we believe, this will be tested and shown to all to be reality. There\u0026rsquo;s nothing subjective about it. And, as any truth, it doesn\u0026rsquo;t depend on my upbringing or my culture, the same way 1+1=2 is truth regardless the age at which I came to believe it.\u0026rdquo;\nLeo didn\u0026rsquo;t want to let Jack off the hook so easily, so he asked again: \u0026ldquo;But what about the parable of the blind men and the elephant? Surely it says something profound about our difference in perspective, doesn\u0026rsquo;t it?\u0026rdquo;\nJack appeared to be pleased at Leo\u0026rsquo;s insistence: \u0026ldquo;We have to be just as careful about parables as we would for any other cliché. These maxims shouldn\u0026rsquo;t be made to bear the weight they\u0026rsquo;re made to bear. This parable perfectly brings back what I said earlier about the occasional illogical aspect of such sayings. When someone says \u0026rsquo;truth is relative\u0026rsquo; isn\u0026rsquo;t that also supposed to be relative? Or do they assume that theirs is the only statement which is to be taken as objective? Same with the parable; one wonders who\u0026rsquo;s telling it, and why does he assume that he\u0026rsquo;s not a blind man as well? Why does he claim the high status of being able to see and why does he consign everyone else to blindness? If this parable is applied to religion, on what ground does he claim all religions are blind? Don\u0026rsquo;t you think he\u0026rsquo;s kind of arrogant? I know I\u0026rsquo;m analyzing the parable beyond what it calls for, but such is required when the parable is misused this way.\u0026rdquo;\nHe added: \u0026ldquo;Also, why does this person get to be the only one who sees the real shape of God? What grants him such status? What does he have that we do not?\u0026rdquo;\nLeo did not expect this answer. In a serious tone he then said: \u0026ldquo;Jack, you\u0026rsquo;re my friend, but I wouldn\u0026rsquo;t want to leave without pointing how arrogant you also sound. This is precisely what religion gets wrong and it\u0026rsquo;s this very attitude by religious people that I can\u0026rsquo;t stomach. You are too bold in your certainty and claim to know it all. How hard is it to see and acknowledge that it\u0026rsquo;d be better to just embrace humility and acknowledge the validity of other people\u0026rsquo;s opinions?\u0026rdquo;\n\u0026ldquo;Don\u0026rsquo;t you also see, \u0026quot; Jack answered as humbly as he could, \u0026ldquo;that you\u0026rsquo;re assuming exactly the very position of the one telling the parable of the blind men? It seems you\u0026rsquo;re pleased to tolerate a plurality of perspectives, except mine. Why is that? Why doesn\u0026rsquo;t your own philosophy help you joyfully embrace my perspective? (Not that I think it\u0026rsquo;s correct, but) Don\u0026rsquo;t you think it has something to do with its unreliability and its shakiness in terms of foundations upon which to build one\u0026rsquo;s life? As for the sin of certainty, you sure also strike me as a person who\u0026rsquo;s pretty certain of what you assert. How different are we? And as for arrogance, since all is relative, perhaps in my view I\u0026rsquo;m really not arrogant and I don\u0026rsquo;t think you want to say I\u0026rsquo;m seeing it all wrong, as that would be totally against the very thing you\u0026rsquo;re supposedly standing for.\u0026rdquo;\nLeo realized there was no convincing him, at least not that late anyway. He then politely smiled and asked that they should get ready to leave. Jack agreed and convinced him that they should continue this discussion and I heard them planning to meet another day for just that purpose.\n","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/truth-is-not-relative/","section":"Articles","summary":"Never was, never will be!","title":"Truth Is Not Relative","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"19 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/worldview/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Worldview","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/tags/amour/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Amour","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/articles/","section":"Articles","summary":"","title":"Articles","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/categories/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Categories","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/tags/gratitude/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Gratitude","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/tags/hommage/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Hommage","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/love/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Love","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/tags/mariage/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Mariage","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/marriage/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Marriage","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/musings/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Musings","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/categories/reflexions/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Réflexions","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/","section":"Remesha","summary":"","title":"Remesha","type":"page"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/tags/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Tags","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/tribute/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Tribute","type":"tags"},{"content":"Chers Papa et Maman,\nQuelle chose extraordinaire que de vivre assez longtemps pour célébrer quarante ans de vie commune ! Je ne voudrais pas, pour votre bien, que cela soit tenu pour acquis. Les vies bénies et les gens bénis passent parfois inaperçus. Nous, vos enfants, sommes cependant trop proches pour ne pas voir, trop proches pour ne rien remarquer, mais assez proches pour avoir l\u0026rsquo;honneur d\u0026rsquo;être ceux qui chantent vos louanges. Et aujourd\u0026rsquo;hui est un tel jour : celui de nous lever et d\u0026rsquo;exprimer notre gratitude envers vous, et envers le Seigneur qui vous a gardés tout au long du chemin.\nQuarante ans, ce n\u0026rsquo;est pas peu de temps \u0026ndash; j\u0026rsquo;en sais quelque chose, moi qui n\u0026rsquo;ai pas encore vécu si longtemps. C\u0026rsquo;est assez long pour qu\u0026rsquo;un serment prononcé à la hâte, dans la chaleur de l\u0026rsquo;instant, finisse par se briser. C\u0026rsquo;est assez long pour que surgissent les tentations, pressant quiconque de jeter ses vœux aux orties et à s’avouer vaincu. Car le vent froid et glaçant des temps difficiles finit toujours par venir éteindre la mèche qui fume encore, et dissiper la chaleur de toute passion prétentieuse. Voilà pourquoi je rends grâce pour cette union qui a essuyé les tempêtes, car il n\u0026rsquo;est jamais acquis que le navire échappe au naufrage ! Et j\u0026rsquo;en suis d\u0026rsquo;autant plus reconnaissant que je suis de ceux dont la vie dépendait de la survie de ce navire !\nLes gens aiment les commencements. Et pourquoi pas ? Ils sont d\u0026rsquo;ordinaire pleins d\u0026rsquo;enthousiasme et d\u0026rsquo;espérance. La nouveauté d\u0026rsquo;une chose évoque ce qui est entier, intact, sans fêlure, que rien n\u0026rsquo;a touché ni gâté, où nulle marque de décrépitude n\u0026rsquo;apparaît. C\u0026rsquo;est ce que nous ressentons dans la plupart des mariages, devant ces jeunes gens sans rides, dont rien n\u0026rsquo;est brisé et dont les cœurs sont immaculés. Mais autant nous nous enthousiasmons pour cette nouveauté, autant nous éprouvons plus d\u0026rsquo;estime encore pour la durée. Traverser toutes sortes d\u0026rsquo;épreuves et en sortir debout : voilà la résistance que nous voudrions tous posséder. Car la beauté d\u0026rsquo;une maison ne compte guère si un vent fort, ou le moindre tremblement de terre, la jette à terre, et la grâce et l\u0026rsquo;élégance d\u0026rsquo;un navire ne valent rien s\u0026rsquo;il ne peut survivre aux bourrasques. De même, dans le mariage, la question n\u0026rsquo;est pas si les épreuves viendront mais quand . Et elles viennent !\nAu cours de ces quarante années, les temps agités n\u0026rsquo;ont pas manqué. Il en est que nous, vos enfants, ignorons et ne connaîtrons sans doute jamais ; des heures difficiles que vous avez portées en secret sur vos épaules (pour nous en préserver, peut-être). C\u0026rsquo;étaient comme des blessures qu\u0026rsquo;il vous fallait cacher sous vos vêtements pour ne pas nous inquiéter. Ou comme des voies d\u0026rsquo;eau sous la ligne de flottaison qu\u0026rsquo;il vous fallait colmater à la peine, pour le salut du navire et de ceux qu\u0026rsquo;il portait. Puis il y en eut d\u0026rsquo;autres, qui vinrent comme des flots en furie, menaçant de briser le navire en pièces. Celles-là, nous les avons bel et bien vues et senties. Quelques-unes nous ont véritablement terrifiés. Je pourrais en citer une poignée qui ont visé tout particulièrement chacun de vos enfants, ou ces moments où nous nous sommes (comme) retournés contre vous et sommes devenus nous-mêmes vos épreuves \u0026ndash; si cela a un sens.\nIl est facile de perdre son sang-froid et de s\u0026rsquo;irriter lorsque le trouble survient ; pourtant je n\u0026rsquo;ai jamais été témoin d\u0026rsquo;un seul moment où vous vous seriez dressés l\u0026rsquo;un contre l\u0026rsquo;autre dans la colère, et jamais rien n\u0026rsquo;a dégénéré en éclats de voix ni en violence. N\u0026rsquo;y a-t-il pas eu de désaccords ? J\u0026rsquo;en suis certain, et en grand nombre ; mais vous nous avez montré que la meilleure façon de les traverser est une attitude de respect et d\u0026rsquo;amour. N\u0026rsquo;y a-t-il pas eu de moments où vous vous êtes mutuellement agacés ? En tout cas je n’ai jamais vu de tel\u0026hellip;.Mais j\u0026rsquo;en suis sûr, il y en eut beaucoup, et vous nous avez ainsi montré (et prouvé) que la vraie grandeur se manifeste lorsqu\u0026rsquo;on est maître de son propre esprit, plutôt que dans la capacité de prendre une ville (Pr 16.32). Vous savez comme certains trouvent tout naturel de rouler des années sans jamais se soucier de l\u0026rsquo;état mécanique de leur voiture ; ceux dont le véhicule est capricieux, eux, ne prennent pas la chose à la légère ! Ainsi vois-je votre mariage, et puissent mes enfants connaître eux aussi cette liberté-là. C\u0026rsquo;est pourquoi, du fond du cœur, je vous remercie d\u0026rsquo;avoir fait tout ce qui était en votre pouvoir pour préserver ce lien sacré. Car nous, vos enfants, avons eu le temps d\u0026rsquo;y glaner des leçons inestimables qui, je l\u0026rsquo;espère, nous survivront à nous aussi.\nLa beauté de ce mariage n\u0026rsquo;a pas brillé seulement dans les ténèbres, la peine et la tourmente. Le ciel ne se renfrogne pas toujours. Il vient un moment où une brise légère descend, apportant le repos et balayant les frayeurs récentes. Nous avons vécu de tels temps avec vous : quand un effort porte enfin ses fruits ; quand les choses suivent leur cours sans heurt et deviennent faciles ; ou quand quelque grâce, par la providence divine, est répandue en abondance sur notre famille. Des moments de joie et de bonheur, des étapes à célébrer, des réussites accomplies et des miracles opérés. Que rendrons-nous au Seigneur pour toutes ses bénédictions et pour tous ses bienfaits ?\nC\u0026rsquo;étaient là les moments calmes, quand la mer était tranquille ; les moments où vous pouviez, pour ainsi dire, tenir la barre. Je rends grâce parce que ce sont des moments où vous n\u0026rsquo;avez pas choisi de vous endormir au gouvernail. À mon sens, ce temps-là est tout aussi important et tout aussi déterminant que les autres, les plus dramatiques. Laisser son navire dériver au caprice de la mer ne mène (presque) jamais à bon port. Pour tous ces moments où vous avez fait le choix délibéré d\u0026rsquo;être présents pour vos enfants et attentifs à ce que nous devenions, où vous avez pris soin de cultiver le jardin autour de nous en veillant à ce qu\u0026rsquo;aucun serpent n\u0026rsquo;y rôde : voilà ce dont je vous suis reconnaissant. Il faut, comme parents, demeurer vigilants, car c\u0026rsquo;est précisément dans les temps paisibles que les prédateurs sont à l\u0026rsquo;affût. Il faut être sur ses gardes et prêt à défendre. Tant que nous étions encore jeunes surtout, et parce que vous nous aimiez, vous n\u0026rsquo;avez pas épargné la verge lorsqu\u0026rsquo;elle s\u0026rsquo;imposait ; il nous en aurait coûté bien davantage. Vous avez discerné avec sagesse qu\u0026rsquo;une folie durable fait plus mal que le joug momentané de la discipline. Les avis divergent sur ce sujet et il est facile de s\u0026rsquo;y tromper (car chaque enfant est unique), mais je suis reconnaissant que vous ayez préféré risquer l\u0026rsquo;erreur et vous y tenir sans faillir, plutôt que de commettre la bien plus grande erreur de ne rien faire du tout.\nUn bon berger ne se contente pas d\u0026rsquo;éloigner les loups : il conduit aussi vers de verts pâturages. Il y a un appel plus haut, qui consiste à enseigner et à transmettre la vertu à ses enfants, car il ne suffit pas de ne pas prendre le mauvais chemin : il faut être assez à l\u0026rsquo;écoute pour mener les cœurs et les esprits dans la bonne direction. Ce n\u0026rsquo;est pas chose aisée, c\u0026rsquo;est coûteux et laborieux, et il faut arpenter les collines à la recherche de ces pâturages. Cela va au-delà de la simple transmission d\u0026rsquo;un savoir : il s\u0026rsquo;agit de cultiver l\u0026rsquo;amour de ce qui est vrai, excellent et digne d\u0026rsquo;honneur. Par votre influence bienveillante, et par la grâce de Dieu, nous sommes tous venus à connaître Celui qui est le chemin, la vérité et la vie. Qu\u0026rsquo;y a-t-il de plus excellent que de conduire ses enfants à la source de toute joie ? Quel plus grand héritage que de voir les siens hériter la vie éternelle ? En cela, Dieu vous a donné du succès ; et pour cela, poussez des cris de joie ! Même si c\u0026rsquo;est là un don de Dieu (car beaucoup ne l\u0026rsquo;ont pas reçu, non faute de désir ou d\u0026rsquo;effort), sa grâce envers vous n\u0026rsquo;a certainement pas été vaine. Nous vous avons vus prier et chanter de joie au Dieu de votre salut, et cela n\u0026rsquo;a assurément pas été sans effet sur nous, car nous avons appris, en vous imitant, à prier et à chanter de joie. Et quelle dette éternelle !\nAussi vous écris-je ceci pour vous encourager (puisque tel est le nom que vous m\u0026rsquo;avez donné) : tous vos efforts n\u0026rsquo;ont pas été vains. En vérité, rien, dans le Seigneur, aucune œuvre bonne n\u0026rsquo;est jamais vaine \u0026ndash; même lorsqu\u0026rsquo;il semble parfois qu\u0026rsquo;elle le soit. Vos sacrifices, votre amour, votre patience, votre endurance, votre persévérance ; tout est vu, et tout nous profitera au-delà de ce que vous pouvez mesurer. « Que vos œuvres vous louent aux portes de la ville » et puissiez-vous « rire en pensant à l\u0026rsquo;avenir » (Pr 31). Nous vous aimons et nous vous sommes reconnaissants de tout ce que vous avez fait et de tout ce que vous avez été pour nous, et nous voulons nous réjouir avec vous aujourd\u0026rsquo;hui. Puissiez-vous, chers parents, vivre assez longtemps pour en voir bien d\u0026rsquo;autres encore et être, comme le dirait votre psaume préféré, « rassasiés » de jours dans votre vieillesse (Ps 91).\nVotre fils qui vous aime,\nRemesha\n","date":"6 septembre 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/articles/an-ode-to-my-parents/","section":"Articles","summary":"Fidèles durant toutes ces années","title":"Une ode à mes parents","type":"articles"},{"content":" \u0026ldquo;Gandalf! I thought you were dead! But then I thought I was dead myself. Is everything sad going to come untrue?\u0026rdquo; 1\nThe answer to the question from the opening quote is, of course, a resounding yes! Everything sad will come untrue. That\u0026rsquo;s not being delusional nor is it wishful thinking and it\u0026rsquo;s also not downplaying how sad, difficult and painful the circumstances can (or have) become. In the question lies an acknowledgment that things are truly awful at the moment but in it also lies seeds of hope. Why hope?\nTrue hope \u0026ndash; if there\u0026rsquo;s such a thing \u0026ndash; isn\u0026rsquo;t based on lies or on willful ignorance of reality. It\u0026rsquo;s a hope which, like light, has the power to pierce through tangible darkness. It\u0026rsquo;s one that believes that, just as it was for our Lord, life springs forth after death. \u0026ldquo;Therefore,\u0026rdquo; writes the Apostle Paul, \u0026ldquo;we do not lose heart.\u0026rdquo;2 He\u0026rsquo;s well aware that, a minute ago, he had just written of how he was \u0026ldquo;so utterly burdened beyond his strength that he despaired of life itself,\u0026rdquo;3 nor does he feign ignorance of the fact that he\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;wasting away outwardly.\u0026rdquo;4 He instead looks straight into what feels like the abyss and calls it \u0026ldquo;a light and momentary affliction.\u0026rdquo;5\nThe pain, toil, difficulty and sadness; all of that is real. Every tear that will be wiped away will have fallen first. The healing will be brought to those who had real wounds and comfort will be ministered to those who first mourned and groaned. Death, the darkest of evils, will be \u0026ldquo;swallowed up in victory,\u0026rdquo;6 but it\u0026rsquo;ll be after it was allowed to unleash untold carnage. Nevertheless, Christian hope is much greater; it proclaims not only the defeat, but also the undoing of evil. For Paul, we\u0026rsquo;re to smile \u0026ndash; and even rejoice7 \u0026ndash; in the face of it and perceive it only as a preparation for \u0026ldquo;an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison.\u0026rdquo;8\n“[Some mortals] say of some temporal suffering, “No future bliss can make up for it,” not knowing that Heaven, once attained, will work backwards and turn even that agony into a glory.” 9\nC. S. Lewis\nWhy then should your soul be downcast, asks the psalmist? Why should it be disquieted within you?10 May not despair cause you to hitch your wagon to the train of evil thereby tying yourself to its fate. Be hopeful in Christ instead; hopeful enough to \u0026ldquo;purify yourself as He is pure.\u0026rdquo;11 Suffer and grieve, but \u0026ldquo;not as those who have no hope\u0026rdquo;12 for the time is coming when \u0026ldquo;night will be no more.\u0026rdquo;13 Moreover, Christ, our \u0026ldquo;hope of glory\u0026rdquo;14 is not far from you; He\u0026rsquo;s not waiting at the end of the tunnel because He walks with you even now, even through the valley of the shadow of death15.\nHope then, brethren, \u0026ldquo;for thus is it spoken: Oft hope is born, when all is forlorn.\u0026rdquo;16 Dare to hope, because everything sad will come untrue!\nSamwise Gamgee to Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings, one of the most moving sentences. Book Six, Chapter 4: \u0026ldquo;The Field of Cormallen\u0026rdquo;, Return of the King, J.R.R. Tolkien\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n2 Corinthians 4:16\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n2 Corinthians 1:8\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n2 Corinthians 4:16\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n2 Corinthians 4:17\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n1 Corinthians 15:54\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nRomans 5:3\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n2 Corinthians 4:17\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nThe Great Divorce, C.S. Lewis, Chapter 9\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nPsalm 42:5\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n1 John 3:3\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n1 Thessalonians 4:13\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nRevelations 22:5\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nColossians 1:27\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nPsalm 23:4\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nLegolas to Gimli in The Lord of the Rings, Book Five, Chapter 9: \u0026ldquo;The Last Debate\u0026rdquo;, Return of the King, J.R.R. Tolkien\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"22 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/everything-sad-will-come-untrue/","section":"Articles","summary":"Absolutely everything!","title":"Everything Sad Will Come Untrue","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"22 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/faith/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Faith","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"22 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/hope/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Hope","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"22 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sad/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sad","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/books/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Books","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/entertainment/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Entertainment","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/movies/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Movies","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/reading/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Reading","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/tv/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"TV","type":"tags"},{"content":" In a print-culture, we are apt to say of people who are not intelligent that we must \u0026ldquo;draw them pictures\u0026rdquo; so that they may understand. Intelligence implies that one can dwell comfortably without pictures, in a field of concepts and generalizations.\nNeil Postman1\nIntroduction # It\u0026rsquo;s not lost on me that the people I mean to appeal to might never get to read this (as they\u0026rsquo;re probably out there watching something interesting), but I thought I\u0026rsquo;d write this anyway, on the off-chance that there\u0026rsquo;s a person reading this who, given the choice, would rather skip reading a book altogether if there was a movie made about it. It\u0026rsquo;s for this reason that I intend to write in such a way as to make the reasoning clear even to those who have never read any of The Lord of the Rings (LOTR) books or have never watched the movies. I\u0026rsquo;m reading the trilogy for the first time in my life, and as I write this, I\u0026rsquo;m currently within the first couple of chapters in the third book The Return of the King, and I have come to think that movies based on it shouldn\u0026rsquo;t have been made in the first place, even though they were great and even though the trilogy ended up as the most decorated in film history .\nThis is an intuition that I kept aside as one of those strange opinions to keep only to oneself, but which only grew as I read LOTR. Most fans of the LOTR movies know that, Christopher Tolkien, the author\u0026rsquo;s son, and the custodian of his father\u0026rsquo;s literary work felt the same . He said this of the movies:\nThe chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has overwhelmed me. The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing.\nThis is a statement I would not have understood \u0026ndash; let alone agreed with \u0026ndash; had I not read the books. However much I agreed with Christopher Tolkien, it is J.R.R. Tolkien, the author himself, who actually explained to me why LOTR should have been best left in its original form. His essay On Fairy Stories is the place where he comes closest to offer an opinion on this matter. In the essay, he says much about the genre itself \u0026ndash; its origin, purpose and utility \u0026ndash; and it all produced in me a greater appreciation for written words as a \u0026lsquo;medium\u0026rsquo; superior to any other form. First, a couple of quotes from the essay:\nIn human art Fantasy is best left to words, to true literature. 2\nDrama is naturally hostile to Fantasy. Fantasy, even of the simplest kind, hardly ever succeed in Drama\u0026hellip; Fantastic forms are not to be counterfeited. 3\nTo be dissolved, or to be degraded, is the likely fate of Fantasy when a dramatist tries to use it, even such a dramatist as Shakespeare. 4\nWhat exactly is dissolved and degraded? Isn\u0026rsquo;t a picture, as they say, \u0026ldquo;worth a thousand words\u0026rdquo;? If that\u0026rsquo;s true, why then waste too much energy crafting and trying to understand words, when (moving) pictures could do a better job?\nPriorities \u0026amp; Limitations # In his book Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil Postman said that it is \u0026ldquo;naive to suppose that something that has been expressed in one form can be expressed in another without significantly changing its meaning, texture or value.\u0026rdquo; Books and movies are very different mediums, each having its own priorities and toolset. An author might want to focus on the psychological or philosophical aspects of a situation by, for example, giving as much information about inner dialogues of characters as possible, but the movies might instead focus on compensating a weakness in this area by showcasing their powers of visual presentation.\nTo press the point a bit further, I\u0026rsquo;d say that, for instance (and I could come up with too many such instances), as far as the attempts made by the movies go, no scene will give me depth of insight into Frodo\u0026rsquo;s inner turmoil whenever he met the Nazgûl. And, setting aside what the movies changed, the profoundness of the scene in the book where we meet (the voice of) Saruman for the first time just can\u0026rsquo;t be reproduced any other way. If a movie cannot adequately intuit non-physical struggles and internal monologues when they\u0026rsquo;re key, won\u0026rsquo;t it deteriorate the quality of the original work? Such then (and many more) are the limitations that are inherent to the medium which, unfortunately, \u0026ldquo;degrades\u0026rdquo; the original work.\nFurthermore, the task of translating a fantasy book into a movie comes with its own temptations. Fantasy as a literary genre creates objects and things that are of special interest to visual artists: supernatural and mythical creatures, heroic quests and enchanting places. The desire to depict complex, intricate and meticulously designed worlds such as found in the LOTR, is not bad in itself: the problem is that special attention will be paid to these elements \u0026ndash; and, of course, as well as the \u0026ldquo;action\u0026rdquo; scenes \u0026ndash; at the detriment of what we would consider \u0026ldquo;normal\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;mundane\u0026rdquo;. More on this in a bit.\nMovies that interpret books that contain a lot of magic and \u0026ldquo;action\u0026rdquo; (such as LOTR) will eventually succumb to a big temptation; one that is hard to resist for those whose job it is to create spectacles to focus on the spectacular elements. The movies cannot focus on, say, the \u0026lsquo;walking\u0026rsquo; described in much detail from the first book because there\u0026rsquo;s really nothing to see and therefore nothing \u0026lsquo;interesting\u0026rsquo; to show. This might not be blamed on the movie producers per se because there\u0026rsquo;s a certain priority or urgency required by movies as a separate and distinct type of art which isn\u0026rsquo;t found in books. A medium with primary visual interests just cannot properly interpret a body of work with different priorities. The medium, the priorities, the limitations, the space, the tools, the canvas\u0026hellip;too much is different, there can only be a \u0026lsquo;chasm\u0026rsquo; between the end results.\nStolen Normalcy # As J.R.R Tolkien says in his essay, one of the purposes of Fantasy is to inject a sort of fresh perspective unto the things we call \u0026ldquo;normal\u0026rdquo;. These are the things that no longer excite us in our day to day lives because, so the thinking goes, these things are simple, known, and there\u0026rsquo;s nothing new about them. And as we\u0026rsquo;ve just seen, movies are less interested in these and are sometimes incapable of reproducing them: therein lies one of its biggest weaknesses. Just what is new or exciting, you\u0026rsquo;d ask, about the sunshine, or the rain or trees?\nTolkien argues that this is precisely one of the things that Fantasy helps recover \u0026ndash; \u0026ldquo;regain a clear view\u0026rdquo;. According to him, Fantasy shows that nothing should be boring under the sun, nothing should become trite, nothing and no one should be domesticated and considered \u0026lsquo;familiar\u0026rsquo; as nothing and no one is fully known. If fantasy is well done and is successful, things that were in \u0026ldquo;your hoard\u0026rdquo; and had become as \u0026ldquo;caged birds\u0026rdquo; are seen from a different angle and thus let loose and \u0026ldquo;set free\u0026rdquo;.\nThe gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous or potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you.5\nHe adds:\nIt was in fairy story that I first divined the true potency of the words, and the wonder of the things, such as stone, and wood and iron; tree and grass; house and fire; bread and wine.6\nThere\u0026rsquo;s a way daily routine numbs us and clouds our perception; things and people become static and dull, frozen in a corner of the mind where we consign all things we\u0026rsquo;ve already \u0026ldquo;mastered\u0026rdquo; or things we no longer find interesting. These are the things we then stop looking at. Fiction however \u0026ndash; and not only fantasy \u0026ndash; has the power to turn things around, and, as it were, break this spell. It recovers the world\u0026rsquo;s vitality, revealing its liveliness, potency, and hidden spark of things, their ceaseless capacity for change and renewal which restores of our sense of wonder.\nThis, as in the previous point, can\u0026rsquo;t be blamed on a particular person; it\u0026rsquo;s the fault of the medium: there\u0026rsquo;s nothing interesting to \u0026lsquo;show\u0026rsquo; for normal things. Skipping the mundane altogether, if you think about it, is the least logical and beneficial thing to do: these are the things we can relate to the most, yet they\u0026rsquo;re taken away from us. What was meant to refresh our perspective is completely cut out. Whereas the movie could only \u0026ldquo;show\u0026rdquo; us the sun, unadorned, and without commentary, the book, through its prose, will instead gently nudge us to take another look, and \u0026ldquo;denote the queerness of things that have become trite\u0026rdquo;. Whereas the movies could only \u0026ldquo;show\u0026rdquo; us \u0026rsquo;the company\u0026rsquo; passing through some forest, the author, through every turn that he narrates, means to prove that trees are not all the same, and that we\u0026rsquo;re never really attentive to landscapes we come across.\nThis is, if you will, the kind of awakening we ultimately miss. With fantasy, one will realize they\u0026rsquo;ve been blind or asleep, not able to truly know the \u0026lsquo;magic\u0026rsquo; of things to which we\u0026rsquo;re so accustomed. There\u0026rsquo;s a deeper reason for recovering the normal as we\u0026rsquo;ll see in the next point, but suffice to say at this juncture that when movies show us people swallowing a morsel of bread, the author intends to tells us more about this \u0026ldquo;waybread\u0026rdquo;; that there\u0026rsquo;s more to it than regularly meets the eye. And these just aren\u0026rsquo;t the places where movies (usually) linger.\nStunted Growth # In my opinion, this is the biggest offense and the biggest failure: movies are where one\u0026rsquo;s imagination goes to die. An exaggeration perhaps, but I believe this is yet another (deeper) reason to recover the \u0026ldquo;normal.\u0026rdquo; In the most basic sense, the imagination can be defined as the mental capacity to create images. One would then wonder what\u0026rsquo;s the use of imagination if the brain doesn\u0026rsquo;t need to do this work, because this functionality is instead delegated to movies. Why struggle making mental images when they\u0026rsquo;re already served for us by the most skilled artists on the silver screen? One can answer these simply with another question: \u0026ldquo;How long will it take for muscles to atrophy for not being exercised?\u0026rdquo; Like an unused tool left to rust, our imagination will loose its sharpness and good condition when neglected.\nWe know, however, that the role of the imagination goes beyond merely creating mental images. When Georges Orwell in Animal Farm creates a fictional farm where pigs take charge, the reader\u0026rsquo;s imagination is not meant to only envision said farm; it must envision the horror that nations become under communism. If the imagination fails to grasp the latter, the reader would have missed the entire point of the novel. In other words, the fictional world must, through the imagination, \u0026ldquo;come out of the book and rest\u0026rdquo;7 into this primary or real world. This implies that perhaps goblins, elves, balrogs, Nazgûl, dragons all symbolize something real in our world if only the imagination was doing its work.\nThis is not to say that movies totally fail in this aspect. After all, doesn\u0026rsquo;t everyone keep wondering what the \u0026lsquo;one ring\u0026rsquo; really symbolizes while watching LOTR movies? Additionally, these strange creatures mentioned are also depicted in the movies, and so there shouldn\u0026rsquo;t be any obstruction for the imagination to do its work. This is all true. However, the problem is that, as Neil Postman puts it eloquently:\nPictures have little difficulty in overwhelming words, and short-circuiting introspection.8\nIn other words, the screen is not where the best reflection happens \u0026ndash; if it ever happens. I do not know any person who, after watching the scene of The Passage of the Marshes or the one of Shelob\u0026rsquo;s Lair , had a moment of deep reflection and contemplation. The average person would say that they found the scenes disturbing and horrifying: these are the kind of things that cause nightmares \u0026ndash; especially at the sight of dead marshes. In many such instances, the sensory overload prevented any form of \u0026lsquo;introspection\u0026rsquo;. On the other hand, when the books tell us something about these creatures \u0026ndash; even in their hideous and ghastly frames \u0026ndash; there\u0026rsquo;s always a hidden invitation and there\u0026rsquo;s room reserved for the reader to think about their nature, to pay attention to a certain quality and quietly engage the imagination into what these creatures actually represent. This isn\u0026rsquo;t what movies do; the visual and musical stimulation that package the whole spectacle impedes the message rather than channeling it.\nThe LOTR, as any good story, aims at the highest emotional impact in specific cases, and, lest I\u0026rsquo;m misunderstood, let me note promptly that I\u0026rsquo;m not advancing the idea that movies should apply less emotional force but I\u0026rsquo;m rather saying that its medium, in many cases, lacks the capacity to do it as effectively as books. For instance, in the first book/movie, the fellowship journeys through Lothlórien, the fairest realm of Elves. I won\u0026rsquo;t deny that the movies painted the place so beautifully, however, their work does not even come close to the magic and enchantment found in the book. Personally, I had forgotten the name of the place, let alone what it looked like, long before starting to watch the third movie.\nThis is not the case for the books. Each sentence was measured and carefully calculated to evoke the highest emotional response and, at the same time, elicit serious reflection (rather than \u0026lsquo;short-circuiting introspection\u0026rsquo;) and it all served the purpose of creating a deep longing for the place. From the moment they approach Lothlórien, the reader notices a drastic change in Legolas, the elf of \u0026rsquo;the company\u0026rsquo;, as he was clearly moved to sing songs about Nimrodel, the river at its western borders.\nFor over an hour as one reads about Lothlórien, beautiful prose and songs and poems all work together to intensify what C.S.Lewis would call a \u0026ldquo;piercing longing\u0026rdquo; in the reader \u0026ndash; at least that\u0026rsquo;s how it felt for me. Even Gimli, the battle-hardened dwarf of the Company, whose people had long held little affection for elves, was visibly awestruck and was openly weeping as they left Lothlórien. Samwise Gamgee felt like he was \u0026ldquo;inside a song\u0026rdquo;9. Page after page, one keeps wondering what sort of place Lothlórien is, and why one feels a longing for an imaginary realm as such. These questions are not silly, and I have no doubt that Tolkien intended to stir such emotions!\nMovies, alas, do not have the space nor the capacity to do that, as the imagination cannot be engaged as well without all those tools available in the literary arsenal. In this case, a picture is far less \u0026lsquo;worth than a thousand words\u0026rsquo; because it is, in some sense, trying to bypass the imagination to get to the visual result, yet Tolkien intended us to go beyond what the eye can see or what the ear can hear. The picture keeps trying, as a helicopter, to fly us to a destination by dodging a sacred journey. And I believe this is one of those instances where the journey, or the pilgrimage, is the actual destination, and, trying to circumvent it certainly ends up leading to the wrong place. Even if it was the correct destination, trying to lift us there to avoid the work would be like always insisting to carry a child rather than letting them walk on their own. Wouldn\u0026rsquo;t that stunt our growth? Would that really serve us in the long run?\nConclusion # Neil Postman said:\n\u0026hellip;I believe the epistemology created by television not only is inferior to a print-based epistemology but is dangerous and absurdist. 10\nI agree. Even if Postman was talking about show business in general, this is certainly applicable to the subject under consideration. I believe that not only do the LOTR movies fail to relay the depth of insight found in the books, but they also actively work against us. If their entire purpose is to \u0026ldquo;show\u0026rdquo; something, very little is certainly left to the imagination. And instead of being sharpened or deepened, the imagination is suspended.\nThe length and the space that the books create is what we desperately need, and the resistance faced page after page as one reads is very important for us to truly know and truly understand what the book is about. The books create plenty of room for desires that one is not even aware of to be kindled and to grow; the same can\u0026rsquo;t be said for movies that are rushing to show you the next fireworks. As Legolas said, one better not \u0026ldquo;spoil the wonder with haste!\u0026rdquo;11\nI\u0026rsquo;d say that watching the movies instead of reading the book is like viewing the highlights of a sports event; even though not a bad thing in itself, no one would substitute one for the other and still pretend they know intimately what happened. In fact those who watch highlights still consider themselves as having missed the entire thing. In a culture that is seeing a concerning decline in reading, the better and useful thing to do would be for the movies to be marketed as made for those for whom, according to Postman\u0026rsquo;s opening quote, we must \u0026ldquo;draw pictures\u0026rdquo; so that they may understand.\nNeil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nJ.R.R. Tolkien, On Fairy Stories, §70\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nibid\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nibid, §71\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nibid, §84\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nibid, §86\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nC.S. Lewis comment on the effect Georges MacDonald\u0026rsquo;s book Phantastes had on him.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nNeil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nFellowship of the Ring, p.351\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nNeil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nThe Return of the King, p.776\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"15 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/why-books-will-always-beat-movies/","section":"Articles","summary":"The screen is where imagination and good entertainment go to die.","title":"Why Books Will Always Beat Movies","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"4 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/allegory/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Allegory","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"4 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/allegory/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Allegory","type":"tags"},{"content":"Books that \u0026ldquo;reviewed\u0026rdquo; me, and that I in turn decided to review. Here is why I write reviews.\n","date":"4 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"","title":"Book Reviews","type":"reviews"},{"content":"","date":"4 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/c.s.-lewis/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"C.S. Lewis","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"4 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/fiction/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Fiction","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"4 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/pilgrim/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Pilgrim","type":"tags"},{"content":"It wasn\u0026rsquo;t my plan to read this book, but as I read its description in Joseph Loconte\u0026rsquo;s War for Middle Earth , I decided to put Loconte\u0026rsquo;s book down and first read Lewis. The decision was made also partly because I still remembered the various captivating things John Piper wrote in the opening chapter of the book The Romantic Rationalist where he quoted a good bit from this book.\nBased on what I\u0026rsquo;ve observed, I\u0026rsquo;d say that this is the least studied among Lewis\u0026rsquo; books, and my guess is that it is partly because this isn\u0026rsquo;t an easy read, as many people warn. Being an allegory which is itself styled after John Bunyan\u0026rsquo;s classic Pilgrim\u0026rsquo;s Progress , at times, I had to do a bit of research to get to the bottom of some of the obscure imagery used by Lewis. Even then, the slow pace that was required to go through it was no stumbling block to me. It was like slowing down and savoring an exotic meal. I learned that this is the first book Lewis published after he became a Christian and that he wrote it in a period of two weeks \u0026ndash; which just boggles my mind and leaves me wondering how someone can produce something of this much substance, shelf life and quality in such a short time!\nThe original subtitle of the book is \u0026ldquo;An Allegorical Apology for Christianity, Reason, and Romanticism\u0026rdquo; and it takes the reader through a number of ideologies that Lewis went through before he came to faith. The protagonist, John, glimpses (or was it a vision?) \u0026ldquo;an Island\u0026rdquo; while he\u0026rsquo;s still a young boy living in \u0026lsquo;Puritania\u0026rsquo; and it awakes in him a strong desire which eventually sets him off in search for said Island. Along the way, John meets various people and goes different places that either know of the Island but don\u0026rsquo;t know the way to it, or, on many occasions, he finds people who try to convince him that there\u0026rsquo;s no such thing as the \u0026ldquo;Island\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; the place where his desire, or \u0026ldquo;intense longing\u0026rdquo; will be satisfied. These people (and places) represent the different ideologies that deal with this metaphysical question.\nIn Bunyan\u0026rsquo;s Pilgrim\u0026rsquo;s Progress, Christian, the protagonist, is motivated by fear to escape the City of Destruction, but in this \u0026lsquo;updated\u0026rsquo; version by Lewis, \u0026ldquo;it is the sensation of Joy that compels John to begin his quest. He is captivated by a desire for what might lie ahead \u0026ndash; not a sense of dread of what lies behind.\u0026rdquo; This is, by the way, Loconte\u0026rsquo;s sentence in War for Middle Earth that pushed me to read this book. This, according to me, and compared to Bunyan\u0026rsquo;s allegory, is a better premise and it is definitely a question that everyone (without exception) would understand. Not everyone is motivated by \u0026ldquo;fear\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;eternal judgment\u0026rdquo; in their pilgrimage, but everyone, as is often said, wants to be happy.\nIn this allegory, Lewis paints many worldviews such as Freudianism, Materialism, Fascism, Pantheism, Anglo-Catholism, Rationalism, Humanism, Stoicism, etc. All these worldview names are only big words that, should you read the book, are painted in vivid colors and show the different ways they deal with the search for happiness, or, perhaps more correctly, how these paths lead people astray. Much can be said about the story, and every single character could be studied and one could produce extensive articles on each, but I\u0026rsquo;ll only say something about the geography of the world in The Pilgrim\u0026rsquo;s Regress because I found this aspect to be profound and insightful.\nAs John sets out on his journey, moving from East to West, he deviates Northward and Southward. In the South, John goes through a warm region; a place of excess of feeling, sensation, a place where pleasure is deified and the cerebral is gradually absent. This is the region that represents emotionalism, mysticism, and so, in other words, it\u0026rsquo;s the place of the visceral. The further south you go, the further from reason, the warmer it gets, and the dirtier the place becomes: vermin, worms, etc. The extreme south is a festering swamp: magicians, witch doctors, ghosts are found there.\nOn the other hand, as he goes up northward, Lewis paints the other extreme side of this world where he encounters people with rigid systems/worldviews that are cold and almost lifeless. These are those who make no place for this \u0026ldquo;desire\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;island\u0026rdquo;, people who are too cerebral in their dispositions (hence the freezing coldness of the region). The place is rocky and has no organic life. At the extreme North, he meets \u0026ldquo;Savage\u0026rdquo; and his army of dwarfs: people who, due to extreme nihilism, have become sub-human.\nAs Lewis talks about these extremes (and everything else in between) in the preface of the book, he says this:\n\u0026ldquo;Opposite evils, far from balancing, aggravate each other. \u0026lsquo;The heresies that men leave are hated most\u0026rsquo;; widespread drunkenness is the father of Prohibition and Prohibition of widespread drunkenness. Nature, outraged by one extreme, avenges herself by flying to the other\u0026hellip; We were made to be neither cerebral men nor visceral men, but Men. Not beasts nor angels but Men \u0026ndash; things at once rational and animal.\u0026rdquo;\nA key thing to note is that there\u0026rsquo;s a Grand Canyon; an immense chasm which blocks John\u0026rsquo;s way to the Island. No one can ever get across to the other side without the help of \u0026ldquo;Mother Kirk\u0026rdquo; who represents the church. This canyon represents the fall of man. The problem is, one must accept the help of Mother Kirk and this is a problem because one is naturally inclined not to trust her, let alone ask her for help. Only through conversion does anyone surrender to Mother Kirk. After a series of wonderful events, John finally crosses the Canyon through Mother Kirk and once he gets to the other side, he realizes there\u0026rsquo;s a sea at the Western most point of this world and that the Island was how the mountains in the eastern side of Puritania (his starting point) looked like. He then must go back (hence the word \u0026ldquo;Regress\u0026rdquo; in the title), together with his friend Vertue.\nAt this juncture, John is a changed man, with new eyes and a new heart. Things don\u0026rsquo;t look quite the same now that he\u0026rsquo;s got a fresh vision, which makes for a fascinating read. John encounters the dangers of the south and the north, among other things, only that they are now dragons that must be defeated.\nThere\u0026rsquo;s obviously much more to say about the virtues of this book and, personally, I found it to be a work of genius. I\u0026rsquo;d go out on a limb and (risk to) say that it is, by far, superior to Bunyan\u0026rsquo;s in the depth of insight. I highly recommend it; and as others have done, I\u0026rsquo;d advise those willing to read it that it might be better to take enough time to go through the book and try to understand every bit of it.\n","date":"4 août 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/the-pilgrim-s-regress/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"What does this allegorical fiction say about human desire?","title":"The Pilgrim's Regress","type":"reviews"},{"content":"","date":"9 juin 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/apologetics/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Apologetics","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"9 juin 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/apologetics/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Apologetics","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 juin 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/douglas-wilson/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Douglas Wilson","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 juin 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/non-fiction/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Non Fiction","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"9 juin 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/obligation/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Obligation","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 juin 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/proof/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Proof","type":"tags"},{"content":" The goal of this small book is to argue that to prove something is to create a moral obligation to believe it. When something is proven, the person to whom it is proven is under an ethical obligation to accept it.\nThis is the very first sentence in the book and it sets our expectations in regard to its objective and scope. Douglas Wilson\u0026rsquo;s short book, though not a philosophical treatise on what it means to prove something, is a book meant to take a closer look on the moral obligation that is created when the truth is heard. There\u0026rsquo;s something of a duty that is inherent and that one must accomplish now that they know the truth. The duty in question is not to be performed at the hearer\u0026rsquo;s leisure, that is, said duty is not to be thought of as optional but as sanctionable. There is a judgment that must take place afterwards, and there\u0026rsquo;s an account to give \u0026ldquo;to Him who is ready to judge the quick and the dead\u0026rdquo; (1 Pet 4:5). If the claims of the gospel are all preached and there\u0026rsquo;s no ethical or moral obligation to follow, why would anyone then be judged?\nSo the judgment will determine the threshold past which every participant was under a moral obligation to listen to what was being said.\nThe word threshold here is not incidental. In any public speaking setting where you have a speaker and listener, there are always people that can see the direction towards which your exposition is heading long before the speaker gets there, and others that aren\u0026rsquo;t that as quick. Moreover, the expositor\u0026rsquo;s capacity to make something plain could be questioned. The point is, for each person, there\u0026rsquo;s a threshold past which they can no longer say that they haven\u0026rsquo;t heard or understood and it\u0026rsquo;s precisely this point that the final judgment will reveal \u0026ndash; and at this point something can be said to have been successfully proven. In other words, truth proven isn\u0026rsquo;t just one option to sit among many others without creating any obligation on the hearers. And when it comes to the gospel, the moral obligation is one upon which the hearer\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;eternal destiny is suspended\u0026rdquo;.\nAnd it\u0026rsquo;s at this juncture that Wilson turns his focus at our postures and attitudes toward the words of truth. How do we, as apologists, take the words we are to preach? What do we count as humility and what do we count as arrogance? How do we behave in light of our partial knowledge? On humility and arrogance, Wilson asks: \u0026ldquo;But what is better \u0026ndash; disobedience that looks humble, or obedience that looks arrogant?\u0026rdquo; Scripture instructs that those who are to preach from it are to speak as if speaking the very \u0026ldquo;oracles of God\u0026rdquo; (1 Pet. 4:11). Wilson knows full well that such instruction sounds arrogant, and that it exhibits, some would say, epistemic hubris. However, the Lord who sends us knows how it looks and therefore how it comes across should not be our primary concern.\n*Where the prophets said, \u0026ldquo;Thus saith the Lord,\u0026rdquo; we would prefer to say, \u0026ldquo;It seems to me.\u0026rdquo;\nAs for the partiality of our knowledge, Wilson insists that even though our knowledge is not exhaustive, it does not follow that we cannot have true knowledge. And the fact that \u0026ldquo;we cannot know the Absolute absolutely does not mean that we cannot know that the Absolute is absolute\u0026rdquo;. God knows our limits when he asks us to believe and when he sends us to proclaim the \u0026ldquo;sure\u0026rdquo; word. The section where Wilson talks of an epistemology that needs to have a certain \u0026ldquo;willingness to obey God\u0026rdquo; if it ever wants to be sensible was of much interest to me as it prompted this1 particular reflection.\nAnd it\u0026rsquo;s in this very section where I found my favorite quote:\nLack of certainty is not measured by a calculus of admitting the possibility of error. That (ironically) is a philosopher\u0026rsquo;s game that modernity taught us. Action (not theory) is the measurement of certainty. The feelings of uncertainty that we may have in a given moment are ultimately irrelevant.\nThis is a short little book that will \u0026lsquo;certainly\u0026rsquo; make the reader think and it is one that I wished was longer.\nYou may read more from this article.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"9 juin 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/proof-as-moral-obligation/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"What does it mean to prove something?","title":"Proof as Moral Obligation","type":"reviews"},{"content":"","date":"14 mai 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/memoir/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Memoir","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"14 mai 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/memoir/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Memoir","type":"tags"},{"content":"In this memoir, Charles Murray traces his journey away from agnosticism towards Christian faith. Being a spiritual and intellectual memoir, the book only gets to details of his life only when they are relevant to the story of how he comes to embrace or question a particular worldview. Of all the events in his life, his wife\u0026rsquo;s conversion to Quakerism is (probably) the catalyst that pushed him to take a closer and more critical look at religion. How can any self-respecting educated person (his wife) ever take religion seriously? He used to believe \u0026ldquo;smart people don\u0026rsquo;t believe this stuff\u0026rdquo;. So, how could she? Murray lays bare his previous prejudice against religion and later on discovers how \u0026ldquo;unreflective\u0026rdquo; his own life had been.\nThe journey described in the book lasted several years; which is not surprising especially if one has to change their entire outlook of the world and life in general. The story is well told, it is engaging, without veering into long and unnecessary personal details of his life. I couldn\u0026rsquo;t put it down as I was gripped by his story.\nHe starts off the journey when he gets a gentle nudge into looking closely into things he previously took axiomatically: why is the world behaving the way it does, \u0026lsquo;why is there something rather than nothing\u0026rsquo;? These, together with other similar questions, were enough to just evoke some suspicion that perhaps there\u0026rsquo;s someone or something that caused the existence of the universe.\nThings get quite interesting when he starts to talk about his thoughts on the origin of the universe, especially as described in the Big Bang Theory. This was a fascinating section, as I had never read the scientific account of the origin of the universe. This addresses the question of how scientists landed on this theory and what methods are used to determine the age of the universe. In fact, Murray calls this a road-to-Damascus moment. I came to know how the initial version of the theory was proposed by an astronomer, Georges Lemaitre, who was himself an ordained Roman Catholic priest and the fact that the theory itself would have been seen as a \u0026ldquo;clumsy attempt to impose a scientific gloss on \u0026lsquo;God said, \u0026lsquo;Let there be light\u0026rsquo; and there was light\u0026rdquo;. The whole thing is truly fascinating.\nMurray is humble enough to let you know that he is not an expert in the field but this doesn\u0026rsquo;t stop him from voicing an educated observation that even science cannot discard the existence of a creator:\n\u0026hellip; I live in a universe that was intentionally designed to permit the development of life. That hypothesis\u0026hellip;requires me to assume an initial miracle that created something rather than nothing\u0026hellip; As far as I can tell, all the cosmologists\u0026rsquo; explanations about the origin of the universe are implicitly saying, \u0026ldquo;I\u0026rsquo;m going to ignore an initial miracle and explain everything else.\u0026rdquo;\nAs he goes on, Murray brilliantly narrates how he came to let go of his orthodox materialism by showing some of the challenges to that worldview. The part about Terminal lucidity was of special interest to me as this was yet another topic I was reading about for the first time. The many near-death experiences documented (by physicians, medical staff and not loved ones who might be biased) show how it is making it increasingly hard for science to only limit the source of consciousness to the human brain: how can a person in full arrest report an out-of-body experience when the parts of the brain that are supposed to produce such are incapacitated? How can this be possible in absence of cardiac output, of respiration and of brain-stem reflexes? This, as he says, \u0026ldquo;amounts to persuasive evidence that is incompatible with a strict materialist theory of consciousness.\u0026rdquo;\nMurray says this:\nI lost what had been one of my sturdiest bulwarks against religious belief that involves me personally. If I am not just a brain in a body, what am I? I had to acknowledge the possibility that I have a soul.\nAll the above facts convince him that \u0026ldquo;God\u0026rdquo;, if one is really intellectually honest, needs to be taken seriously! This was still miles away from accepting Christianity the way his wife had. For Murray, the pivotal moment came about when a friend of his handed him a copy of Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. He was still reluctant to embrace religion of any kind as he still maintained that \u0026ldquo;smart people don\u0026rsquo;t believe this stuff\u0026rdquo;, yet we have in Lewis an \u0026ldquo;immensely erudite\u0026rdquo; person who believed that \u0026lsquo;stuff\u0026rsquo;. I was quite pleased to read of his appreciation of Lewis and how his treatment of Moral Law drove him to accept not only that \u0026ldquo;God has a relationship with humans, but that God is ultimate Goodness\u0026rdquo;. But it is Lewis\u0026rsquo; challenge; the one where he says that no one can take Christ with ambivalence (he\u0026rsquo;s either a lunatic, a demon or the Son of God) that pushed Murray to take a serious look into Christ.\nReading this part was a true delight. Murray mounts a serious defense on the historicity of the New Testament (the text itself as well as some of the key contents of the four gospels). He rejects the revisionists that portray the stories to only be legends and offers many facts proving that the text we read in our Bibles represent true history. I appreciated his honesty when he admits that he cannot know that some of the miracles recorded really happened. However, for the great miracle, the one without which the entire New Testament would not make sense \u0026ndash; the resurrection \u0026ndash; Murray seems to have no choice other than accept it because, as he lays it out eloquently, it\u0026rsquo;s an event that cannot just be explained away.\nAs Murray points out often, this was an empirical sort of journey, and not really a spiritual one. This is to say that, what you\u0026rsquo;ll find in this book is a man tracing his thoughts and how they changed throughout the years. Even though it is a journey that tells you that \u0026lsquo;smart people do believe this stuff\u0026rsquo;, it doesn\u0026rsquo;t tell you how the \u0026lsquo;smart people\u0026rsquo; end up kneeling down to worship God in his Son; because one thing is sure: Christianity is more than a system of thought to ascend to: There\u0026rsquo;s a LORD to obey, a God to pray to and \u0026lsquo;sins\u0026rsquo; to confess \u0026ndash; among other things. Even with the lack of the spiritual aspect of the journey, this is still a worthwhile read and a solid book for thinking and framing theism well in general and Christianity in particular.\n","date":"14 mai 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/taking-religion-seriously/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"What happens when a political scientist examines religion?","title":"Taking Religion Seriously","type":"reviews"},{"content":"","date":"28 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/culture/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Culture","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"28 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/music/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Music","type":"tags"},{"content":"Let\u0026rsquo;s begin, briefly, with beauty. It is obvious, isn\u0026rsquo;t it, why this should be our starting point: beauty, in some measure, is why we\u0026rsquo;re speaking of this to begin with. It may lie in the tune, the harmonies, the rhythm, or the rhymes; even when the message of the song is misguided, something, however tiny, of beauty remains in it! If there isn\u0026rsquo;t any beauty to speak of, or if there isn\u0026rsquo;t anything right with the song, there wouldn\u0026rsquo;t be any pull, any temptation, or any audience, and no one would bother. Take beauty away, and the spell is broken.\nAllow me to digress a bit, pushing the point to the extreme, to say something about evil in general. Even if I was the devil himself, the fact that I must make use of beauty to render my music palatable for my human listeners already says a lot: evil cannot and will not succeed without stealing from the good and it can\u0026rsquo;t ensnare anyone unless it reaches beyond itself. Why else would it disguise itself and why else must it, as it were, whitewash itself? And yet many still maintain the misguided notion that good and evil are equal but opposite powers\u0026hellip; C.S. Lewis put it like this:\n\u0026quot;\u0026hellip;even to be bad [the evil one] must borrow or steal from his opponent. And do you now begin to see why Christianity has always said that the devil is a fallen angel? That is not a mere story for children. It is a real recognition of the fact that evil is a parasite, not an original thing. The powers which enable evil to carry on are powers given it by goodness.\u0026quot; 1\nSome musicians may well be, for all we know, cursing God, but they\u0026rsquo;ll at least try to sugarcoat the stench underneath with some good and sweet background music. And if you\u0026rsquo;re not a demon to be attracted to raw and undisguised evil, you\u0026rsquo;ll definitely need this little sweetness layered on top to be able to listen. Previously, I spoke precisely in these terms, as I evaluated the song \u0026ldquo;Imagine\u0026rdquo; by John Lennon who admitted in an interview that \u0026ldquo;anti-conventional\u0026rdquo; messages, if made for public consumption, must be put \u0026ldquo;across with a little honey\u0026rdquo;. This is the (unspoken) rule for general acceptance.\nWhy then, you\u0026rsquo;d wonder, don\u0026rsquo;t we look beyond the sugarcoating and inspect the whole thing instead? Are we that shallow? Well, not quite. Apart from the obvious reason that we\u0026rsquo;re sometimes blind to the evil in these songs, there could be a host of other reasons. The first I can speak about is as stated above: the beauty used to package these songs is real! The message behind the songs could be about a real ache, a real longing, or the song may be asking genuine questions, or else it could help express what you can\u0026rsquo;t on your own. Certainly, the feelings expressed may be \u0026ldquo;disordered\u0026rdquo;, but they still contain a kernel of truth, the same way a child may come crying, his words incoherent and his demands unreasonable; but it doesn\u0026rsquo;t mean that their pain is not real. Likewise, you cannot say, upon seeing a desperate man trying to drink salty sea water, that their thirst is not genuine. Even distorted messages are able to convey truth, just as a signal, though degraded by noise, can still carry meaningful content.\nLeonard Bernstein said this about Beethoven\u0026rsquo;s music:\nBeethoven\u0026hellip;turned out pieces of breath-taking rightness. Rightness \u0026ndash; that\u0026rsquo;s the word!\u0026hellip; Our boy has the real goods, the stuff from Heaven, the power to make you feel at finish: something is right with the world. There is something that checks throughout, that follows its own law consistently: something we can trust, that will never let us down. 2\nThere\u0026rsquo;s deep insight into what Bernstein says here. Having tasted beauty through Beethoven\u0026rsquo;s music, he treated it all as a signpost to something even greater: \u0026ldquo;Something is right with the world!\u0026rdquo; He realized that the universe could not have been pointless or accidental. Whereas the rest of us, perhaps even Beethoven himself, would admire the craft of the music and stop there, Bernstein sees beyond it; he perceives where beauty leads.\nThis is what we fail to see and it is our main problem: the fact that we often treat beauty as the destination. This is like reading the first page of a novel and claiming to know the story, or like settling for crumbs when a feast is offered. We want to dwell on the \u0026ldquo;rightness\u0026rdquo; and the song\u0026rsquo;s ability to evoke these feelings and longings (however distorted), without seeing \u0026ndash; or even wanting to see \u0026ndash; towards which direction it is all pointing us. It seems that our issue is not intellectual after all; but visceral. What do I mean?\nWhat I mean is, just because, for instance, sexual desire is legitimate (in the context of committed love), it doesn\u0026rsquo;t mean that lust \u0026ndash; its counterfeit, and a theme not surprisingly prominent in secular music \u0026ndash; will satisfy. But, if one dares to look beyond the lust in its distortion and in its toxicity (as acknowledged in so many secular songs), someone might see that there was a \u0026ldquo;beautiful design\u0026rdquo; behind the legitimate desire all along. The aforementioned desperate man would probably not listen if you tell him that he ought to surrender the toxic water, turn around and spend more energy in search of clean and pure water. He\u0026rsquo;d settle for what he can see, thank you very much. Letting go, having a faith greater than the longing, and start on another (difficult) quest, is what most of us are not willing to do, even though it is what we truly need.\nPerhaps, we\u0026rsquo;re unwilling to go on what could be a fool\u0026rsquo;s errand in search for what is possibly beyond, because we\u0026rsquo;d rather grab what\u0026rsquo;s unmistakably in front of our eyes. Faith is what\u0026rsquo;s lacking. If we had faith, we\u0026rsquo;d believe. We\u0026rsquo;d direct our yearning to the realm of abiding pleasures, and refuse the fleeting. Remember Abraham\u0026rsquo;s longing and how it was never dismissed; in fact God promised him what seemed even more absurd. But, looking toward heaven, he believed in a pay-off that would surpass the number of stars in the sky. And coming back to the theme of love, the Apostle Paul doesn\u0026rsquo;t vilify it; he says that the love between man and woman is as a \u0026ldquo;profound mystery\u0026rdquo;, one referring to, believe it or not, Christ and his bride (Ephesians 5:32). Outlandish though it may sound, if we could only believe and let go of what we\u0026rsquo;ve known, and see for ourselves that there really is something, or rather a \u0026ldquo;Someone\u0026rdquo;, beyond the gift \u0026ndash; the Giver of it! \u0026ldquo;Taste and see!\u0026rdquo; (Psalm 34:8)\nFor those who\u0026rsquo;ve been \u0026ldquo;enlightened\u0026rdquo; in the sense of having seen and tasted the only water that can quench our thirst, why would we go back to the poisoned well? Why would anyone forsake the fountain of living waters and hew out broken cisterns that can hold none? (Jeremiah 2:13) Why settle for a counterfeit, knowing the soon coming disappointment? Why sing about the light from a candle when the sun stands shining outside? Why dance for the shadow, when you know the substance? Why praise the beauty of a dying flower, when you stand within reach of a lush and verdant garden? If your eyes once beheld true glory and true beauty, why still feed on what is but a thin veneer concealing corruption? And having arrived at the destination, why still sing about the signpost?\nAnd for those who\u0026rsquo;ve never seen anything beyond their longings, and indeed who do not agree that there\u0026rsquo;s more to their burning thirst, I\u0026rsquo;d only tell you one thing: Have faith! I\u0026rsquo;d also leave you with this quote I\u0026rsquo;ve shared many times:\n\u0026hellip;it would seem that our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an 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.3\nMere Christianity, C.S. Lewis, p.240.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nReason For God, Tim Keller, p.156.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nThe Weight of Glory, Essay Collection \u0026amp; Other Short Pieces, C.S. Lewis, p.96.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"28 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/on-listening-to-secular-music/","section":"Articles","summary":"Things to consider as one consumes music in general.","title":"On Listening to Secular Music","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"28 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/secular-music/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Secular Music","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"28 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/song/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Song","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"28 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sound/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sound","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/appearances/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Appearances","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/atonement/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Atonement","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/believe/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Believe","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/cross/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Cross","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/good-friday/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Good Friday","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/lent/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Lent","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/mystery/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Mystery","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/revelation/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Revelation","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/shorts/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Shorts","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sight/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sight","type":"tags"},{"content":" \u0026ldquo;Then he said to them, \u0026lsquo;My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me.\u0026rsquo;\u0026rdquo; (Matthew 26:38)\n\u0026ldquo;And being in agony he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground (Luke 22:44)\n\u0026ldquo;And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying,“Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)\nHow could the one who dwells in unapproachable light, the fountain of all joy, ever be approached, nay, \u0026ldquo;overwhelmed\u0026rdquo; by dark clouds of sorrow? And how could the creator of the universe, the one who breathed out stars, ever struggle and labor to the point of agony? The one who is too pure to behold evil was numbered with the transgressors and \u0026ldquo;made sin for us\u0026rdquo;1 without ever becoming sinful. How could the beloved Son who, throughout eternity, had always been basking in his Father\u0026rsquo;s pleasure2 face torments of desolation. That fateful afternoon, He cried in dereliction. The author of life, by mere humans, was killed3. How could it be? How can it be?\n\u0026ldquo;It is the glory of God to conceal a matter\u0026rdquo;4. Such concealment is not meant as a cat-and-mouse game, a deceptive trick, or a cover for inconsistency. He graciously veils what we, through our inadequacies and insufficiency, are incapable of grasping. It\u0026rsquo;s no fault of the ocean that no human brain can contain all its secrets. Things, however, were not left completely opaque. This glorious mystery, \u0026ldquo;though kept secret for long ages\u0026rdquo;5, was at last disclosed, in Christ. As with a telescope that scans the boundless expanse of space, yet cannot exhaust its immensity, we behold what was once concealed, though it still \u0026ldquo;surpasses knowledge\u0026rdquo;6. It is true that the veil was lifted over our faces, but we still see only in part. And though this glorious light has dawned within our hearts7, we cannot behold its full and manifold radiance.\nTherefore, human reason gazes, yet cannot take it in whole. \u0026ldquo;The presence in our theology of unsolved problems is not necessarily a reflection on the truth and adequacy of our thoughts\u0026rdquo;8, said J.I. Packer. Unresolved tensions do not undermine truth. We see only as in a mirror dimly9, yet the light we catch is real. Though our vision is only partial, what we glimpse is no illusion. It\u0026rsquo;s true sight. We know truly, though not exhaustively. And what\u0026rsquo;s revealed is not just any truth, it is the truth, and one by which \u0026ndash; or to be precise, by whom \u0026ndash; we have eternal life.\nFor this season of lent, I studied through a book on the Atonement. You may check my notes below, should this be of any interest and make sure to subscribe by email to get notified when new articles are published. The Day the Revolution Began Series The Day the Revolution Began - Part V Mission, Love \u0026 Conclusion 31 March 2026\u0026middot;11 mins Non Fiction Theology Concluding our Journey of \u0026lsquo;Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion\u0026rsquo;. The Day the Revolution Began - Part IV The Cross According to Paul 26 March 2026\u0026middot;15 mins Non Fiction Theology Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion in Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters. The Day the Revolution Began - Part III The Cross in the Gospels \u0026 Acts 19 March 2026\u0026middot;18 mins Non Fiction Theology Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion in the Gospels and the book of Acts. The Day the Revolution Began - Part II The Stories of Israel 10 March 2026\u0026middot;12 mins Non Fiction Theology In what sense was the death of Jesus \u0026lsquo;in accordance with the Scriptures\u0026rsquo;? The Day the Revolution Began - Part I A Layman's Review 1 March 2026\u0026middot;17 mins Non Fiction Theology Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion. 2 Corinthians 5:21\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nMatthew 3:17\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nActs 3:15\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nProverbs 25:2\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nRomans 16:25\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nEphesians 3:19\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n2 Corinthians 4:4-6\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nWhat did the cross achieve? (102) in \u0026ldquo;The J.I. Packer Collection\u0026rdquo;, McGrath Alister E.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n1 Corinthians 13:12\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/the-mystery-of-dereliction/","section":"Articles","summary":"Human reason gazes, yet it cannot take it in whole.","title":"The Mystery of Dereliction","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/veil/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Veil","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"2 avril 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/vision/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Vision","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"31 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/crucifixion/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Crucifixion","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"31 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/n.t.-wright/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"N.T. Wright","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"31 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/series/the-day-the-revolution-began/","section":"Series","summary":"","title":"The Day the Revolution Began","type":"series"},{"content":" The \u0026ldquo;rulers and authorities\u0026rdquo; really had been dealt their death blow\u0026hellip;\u0026ldquo;Jesus is now Lord of this world, and we must live under his lordship and announce his kingdom.\u0026rdquo; The revolution had begun. (391-92)\nIntroduction # As we come to the end of this (long) series on N.T. Wright\u0026rsquo;s book The Day the Revolution Began , and in light of all that we\u0026rsquo;ve seen that the Scriptures teach about the meaning of the cross, what should we learn and then do?\nThe triumphant Lord sends his church to a glorious \u0026ldquo;mission\u0026rdquo;, and reading Wright sketching it out in the book was, to say the least, a very moving and exhilarating experience. This is a mission which is in line with God\u0026rsquo;s character, and also in line with the power and victory, drastically redefined in the Cross.\nMission \u0026amp; Love # \u0026ldquo;If Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death really did launch a revolution, what does it look like, and how do we join in?\u0026rdquo; (356). If the goal of Christ\u0026rsquo;s saving work is for disembodied souls to go to heaven, then the mission becomes only about urging people to believe the message so that their souls go to heaven. The saying \u0026ldquo;This world is not our home\u0026rdquo;, if truly embraced in this \u0026ldquo;platonized\u0026rdquo; way, will demotivate anyone striving to do anything good in this world, because, \u0026ldquo;Why plant a tree if the garden is going to be dug up tomorrow\u0026rdquo; (357)? However, since Wright labored so much to show that this \u0026ldquo;platonized\u0026rdquo; goal is pagan at its core, we have, thankfully, a much more intricate mission.\nThe Christian mission, as Wright notes, means \u0026ldquo;implementing the victory that Jesus won on the cross\u0026rdquo; (358). We are to pray, daily, as the Lord instructed, for \u0026ldquo;His kingdom to come on earth as it is in heaven\u0026rdquo; and not for us to escape this world to go to heaven. We ought to have (what has been called) the \u0026ldquo;Puritan hope\u0026rdquo;: the vision that the kingdoms of the world would become the kingdom of God, as it says in Revelation 11:15 (359). If thinking about how this should be done, Wright warns of two dangers to avoid: triumphalism and despair.\nDespair is what characterizes the platonized and escapist wrong goal of disembodied souls going to heaven. This despair preaches a message of forgiveness that \u0026ldquo;leaves the powers to rule the world unchallenged\u0026rdquo; (362); rulers that should bow to the Lordship of Christ. This despair is blind to the victory won at the cross and is oblivious of the \u0026ldquo;revolution\u0026rdquo; begun on the day our Lord was crucified. The despair sees correctly how dark and deeply the power of sin really lays a hold on this world, but it doesn\u0026rsquo;t see any hope in the resurrection power, the mighty rescue of God from the \u0026ldquo;present evil age\u0026rdquo; and the inauguration of the \u0026ldquo;world to come\u0026rdquo;.\nOn the other hand, we have well intentioned individuals seeking for justice and peace in this world but falling into some sort of triumphalism, forgetting that the victory of the cross will be implemented through the means of the cross (366). As they set out to effect social change, they go with the illusion that it will be an easy task. As Wright notes, there\u0026rsquo;s the expectation that, since Jesus died, there won\u0026rsquo;t be, so they suppose, any more dying. But this is far from the message of the New Testament: \u0026ldquo;The fact that the victory had already been won when Jesus died did not mean that Herod wouldn\u0026rsquo;t kill James\u0026rdquo; (368), and it didn\u0026rsquo;t mean that Paul and Silas wouldn\u0026rsquo;t be beaten (Acts 16).\nThe balanced and biblical mission to which the church is called is much more nuanced, and much more in line with the heart of God for the world. It is one that acknowledges that \u0026ldquo;the revolution that began on the cross only works through the cross\u0026rdquo; (368). This view takes into account how the cross redefines power, humility and victory. It recognizes that since \u0026ldquo;suffering was the means of the victory, it is also the means of its implementation\u0026rdquo; (372). Wright adds:\nThe revolution he accomplished was the victory of a strange new power, the power of covenant love, a covenant love winning its victory not over suffering, but through suffering. This meant, inevitably, that the victory would have to be implemented in the same way, proceeding by the slow road of love rather than the quick road of sudden conquest. (374)\nThe Powers and the Power of Love # Did we, Wright asks, really think it was going to be through \u0026ldquo;arrogant, self-aggrandizing force of arms\u0026rdquo;? Perhaps we did; the same way James \u0026amp; John, having been around Jesus for so long, thought it was going to be when they wanted to call down fire from heaven to destroy the Samaritan village that did not welcome them (374). It is therefore not through mere effort that the implementation of the mission should be, but through faith and prayer, with an expectation that suffering and humiliation might not only become what we must endure, but also the tools by which the victory of the cross will be made manifest.\nThis, in my opinion, is a vision with a healthy dose of biblical realism. It\u0026rsquo;s a vision that really sends us out to pursue justice, beauty and peace in this world, as well as announcing the victory of the cross in a world that is already occupied and has \u0026ldquo;authorities\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;powers\u0026rdquo; over it. It\u0026rsquo;s a vision telling us that there will certainly be a need to confront the idols of this world, not, of course, armed with arrogance and all sorts of physical weapons, but clothed in the power of love and suffering, hope and faith. We know that Mammon (god of Money), Aphrodite (god of love) and Mars (god of war) are truly worshiped all around the world. (Human) Sacrifices are regularly offered to these idols. However, believing Jesus is also believing in the defeat of these idols, no matter how powerful they seem, and that \u0026ldquo;it is now possible \u0026ndash;despite what many say and most believe \u0026ndash; to resist them and find radically different ways of addressing global difficulties\u0026rdquo; (397). And part of the Christian vocation is \u0026ldquo;precisely to celebrate Jesus as Lord on the territory where other gods have been worshiped\u0026rdquo; (398).\nThis, therefore, might imply, as it were, to speak truth to power and especially to speak up for those with no power at all (400). True Christian hope is not about keeping out of politics nor teaching people how to pray and not meddle in public affairs. True Christian hope doesn\u0026rsquo;t give us a choice to \u0026ldquo;retreat into the Christian private space\u0026rdquo;. We must be prepared to \u0026ldquo;do what Jesus did with Pontius Pilate: confront them with a different vision of kingdom, truth and power\u0026rdquo; (401). The forgiveness of sins, as Wright showed on multiple occasions, is one that \u0026ldquo;breaks the grip of the powers\u0026rdquo;. If Christians have seen success before in instances like the abolition of slavery trade, Wright says, there will be success again, because the victory of the cross is real, and \u0026ldquo;the power of the Spirit to implement that victory is real as well\u0026rdquo; (403)!\nThis, then, is the revolution that was launched the day Jesus died on the cross. It\u0026rsquo;s one that calls His church not to retreat so as to go to heaven, but to resist, as it were, the powers that be, knowing full well the inherent difficulties and sufferings and profound depression that might result in doing this. As Wright says, \u0026ldquo;that is part of taking up the cross\u0026rdquo; (404). It\u0026rsquo;s a revolution calling us to holiness and sends us, in faith and prayer, to bring the \u0026ldquo;reign of Jesus to bear in places where up to now the powers have held sway\u0026rdquo; (406) and proclaim the Lordship of Christ. It\u0026rsquo;s a revolution that warns that suffering would not be merely incidental but the means by which that future would be achieved (406).\nGeneral Remarks # As intimated in the introduction, the purpose of this study was not only to get a deeper understanding of the meaning of the cross on the intellectual level, but also so that the same understanding goes deep in my heart and transforms me by the power that it carries. Was that goal achieved? Looking back now, and in conclusion, I\u0026rsquo;d like to answer that question by offering general remarks about the book:\nThere\u0026rsquo;s much to praise in this book. Wright traces the story of our redemption throughout the entire scriptures and implicitly makes a strong case for the unity of the Bible so that instead of having detached parts that don\u0026rsquo;t seem to be related, you end up instead with a coherent vision, especially as it pertains to this central doctrine of the Christian faith. I did appreciate Wright\u0026rsquo;s exposition of the theme of \u0026ldquo;exile\u0026rdquo; and how he shows its prominence in the key stories and events in Scripture and how it relates to that of the \u0026ldquo;forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo;. This theme has shown up in a number of his books, notably Jesus and the Victory of God, but I did appreciate him bringing it up especially in this study of the meaning of the cross. I believe it\u0026rsquo;s a category that illuminates and helps make sense of the story of the Bible. However, I\u0026rsquo;ve personally not encountered many other authors working with this framework as much as Wright; so if you, dear reader, know of any other author(s) who wrote about it, whether positively or negatively, you may point me in the direction of resources that might help me think well about this. Wright puts the first Passover and the events of the Exodus front and center; as the main interpretative grid of the cross. The very few books I\u0026rsquo;ve read about this topic in the past all organize their study around existing theories (or models) of the Atonement. That no doubt has its benefit, but listening to Wright argue, using scripture, for the primary place of Exodus for our interpretation of the cross was truly wonderful (even as he shows the way to integrate this in a balanced way with the other model that\u0026rsquo;s often and normally emphasized over the others: Penal Substitutionary Atonement). After all, and according to Wright, Jesus himself emphasized this very \u0026ldquo;model\u0026rdquo; and therefore we should pay close attention \u0026ndash; without of course discarding these other models. Wright shows how the cross was a kind of power showdown between Jesus and the idols and, even if it seems counter intuitive and upside down, his death marks the ultimate defeat of the dark powers of evil and it is precisely what brings humans freedom from their slavery. The walk through the stories of the gospel was certainly eye-opening and it showed how evil was gathering itself to its full height and how Jesus defeated it in His death. This surely broadens the utility of the four Gospels (long ignored when it comes to the Atonement) and brings them back, I\u0026rsquo;d say, to the center of our investigations on the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death. If understood well, the theme of the \u0026ldquo;kingdom of God\u0026rdquo; which is so ubiquitous in the gospels can therefore be understood as what the cross establishes \u0026ndash; and therefore continues even beyond the four gospels; without necessarily using the same terms. In this book, Wright seeks to demolish the \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo; view and he certainly lands many good arguments against it throughout the book. However, I\u0026rsquo;d confess that reading his dense chapters on the book of Romans left a bitter taste in my mouth. As I read and re-read especially the first four chapters of Romans, I failed to interpret them the way he suggests. To be fair, since this wasn\u0026rsquo;t a commentary on the letter, much was left unsaid. Be that as it may, I think the \u0026ldquo;traditional\u0026rdquo; reading of chapters 1-4 is correct in many ways even though Wright insists on interpreting some verses differently. Discussions on Romans can get quite dense and I can\u0026rsquo;t really present my disagreements of a reading he spent close to a hundred pages developing. That said, Wright constantly requests his readers to abandon old readings and old concepts (like imputation, and perhaps, propitiation) so often that one gets weary. Perhaps the old interpretations have good grounding in Scripture and we can\u0026rsquo;t just throw them aside. If the \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo; perspective keeps emphasizing our moral failure (as opposed to Wright\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;vocational\u0026rdquo; failure), perhaps there\u0026rsquo;s a good reason for it, and perhaps there are big chunks of scripture to back that perspective. Therefore, when it comes to Romans at least, a separate work fully focused on its particular context and background would be more helpful to me; especially if I\u0026rsquo;m to re-interpret it. Lastly, the last two chapters reviewed in this article were for me, if you couldn\u0026rsquo;t tell from the summary, deeply moving. There was much that he says in this regard in his previous book Surprised by Hope, but it would be fascinating, wouldn\u0026rsquo;t it, to have a work purely focused on eschatology. The Bible has much to say about end times, and consequently the goal of redemptive history, and that\u0026rsquo;s (probably) why there are so many views and various interpretations; some of which would no doubt disagree with what Wright says here (and said elsewhere). Personally, I agree with Wright, at least as far as this book is concerned, but I\u0026rsquo;d love to see him getting his hands dirty and address many controversial topics in the many existing Christian perspectives of the end times; notably where he\u0026rsquo;d place the millennium in God\u0026rsquo;s future plan for this world. Not many people would painstakingly read through these notes, but if you, by any chance, have, I\u0026rsquo;d like to thank you for this, and would love to hear from you if you\u0026rsquo;re interested. Once again, thank you and I wish you a happy Resurrection day.\n","date":"31 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/the-day-the-revolution-began-part-5/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"Concluding our Journey of \u0026lsquo;Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion\u0026rsquo;.","title":"The Day the Revolution Began - Part V","type":"reviews"},{"content":"","date":"31 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/theology/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Theology","type":"categories"},{"content":" Introduction # So many studies on the Atonement, as previously mentioned, focus on the New Testament epistles in general and Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters in particular. It is somewhat understandable as, virtually each page of this section of the New Testament references the death of Jesus in one way or the other.\nIn N.T. Wright\u0026rsquo;s study, he does not intend to do a detailed exploration of a theology of the cross as found in the epistles as that would take a whole book by itself. He seeks rather to address central passages where Paul says, according to him, the very same things that the evangelists have said about Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death, although from \u0026ldquo;different angles and in a variety of different contexts\u0026rdquo;. After all, Paul is among those \u0026ldquo;who received\u0026rdquo; that which he himself now delivers \u0026ldquo;as of first importance\u0026rdquo; unto the Corinthians; \u0026ldquo;that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures\u0026rdquo; (1 Corinthians 15:3).\n\u0026ldquo;Why only Paul?\u0026rdquo;, you\u0026rsquo;d ask. N.T. Wright wishes he had looked closely in particular at the Letter to the Hebrews, the First Letter of Peter and the book of Revelation, but was constrained with space since Paul\u0026rsquo;s material is sufficient for a lifetime of study. In any case, Wright says that the remaining letters \u0026ldquo;offer other angles of vision\u0026rdquo; complementing the picture he sketches in this book (350).\nSo, how does Paul talk about the cross and is what he says in line with what Wright has been saying so far? Is it all in line with Wright\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;covenant of vocation\u0026rdquo;? Does Paul make Passover the interpretative grid the same way our Lord does so himself (according to what we learned from the gospels)? Wright selects a few key texts and goes through their respective contexts to make his case.\nGalatians # Wright starts with Paul\u0026rsquo;s letter to the Galatians, which according to him, is about \u0026ldquo;unity\u0026rdquo; rather than what many have assumed to be a letter about \u0026ldquo;salvation\u0026rdquo;. Obviously, the theme of salvation comes through the letter but it\u0026rsquo;s not, according to Wright, the central argument. What God promised to Abraham is finally coming to pass: a \u0026ldquo;single family in which believing Jews and believing Gentiles form one body\u0026rdquo; (234), and that has come to pass thanks to the cross. How does Wright figure that out?\nIn the opening statement in 1:3-4, Paul talks about how Jesus gives \u0026ldquo;himself for our sins, to rescue us from the present evil age\u0026rdquo;. Wright identifies a Passover echo here as there\u0026rsquo;s a redemption and liberation from a hostile power which is clearly in view. This is a new Exodus, \u0026ldquo;not from political enslavement under pagan empires, as in the original Exodus, but from the ultimate enslavement under the force of Sin as a power\u0026rdquo; (235). In this perspective, the themes of return from exile and forgiveness of sins fit in very well if we grant that Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death accomplishes what the ultimate Exodus is supposed to achieve. The Passover narrative, according to Wright, is not only prevalent, but, \u0026ldquo;at the center of the letter\u0026rdquo; (237). Take what Paul says in 4:3-7 when he talks about those who were \u0026ldquo;kept in slavery\u0026rdquo; but who are now \u0026ldquo;redeemed\u0026hellip;so that we might receive adoption as sons\u0026rdquo;. Redemption is spoken about again in 3:13-14:\nChrist redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us \u0026ndash; for it is written, \u0026ldquo;Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.\nWright doesn\u0026rsquo;t waste the opportunity to show, through these two verses, how our presentations of the Gospel have fallen short. We usually speak of Jesus bearing a \u0026ldquo;curse\u0026rdquo; for us, so that we might be \u0026ldquo;justified\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;go to heaven\u0026rdquo;. Paul instead talks of a different goal altogether: the fulfillment of Abraham\u0026rsquo;s promises. Wright reaffirms penal substitution as Christ bearing \u0026ldquo;the Deutoronomic curse\u0026rdquo; (penal) so that no one has to bear the curse anymore (substitution). He criticizes the \u0026ldquo;Platonizing distortions\u0026rdquo; of always reading passages with a \u0026ldquo;going to heaven\u0026rdquo; goal when it is really about, according to Wright, returning to the Abrahamic promise and vocation of being the means of the blessing for the whole world. The Gentiles are therefore included and that\u0026rsquo;s why Wright says that Paul\u0026rsquo;s central argument in the letter is the unity of the family, that is, that the Messiah now has one family, not two (242), as was supposed by those who wanted to force Gentiles to become Jews and impose some sort of ethnic separation. To suppose there\u0026rsquo;s still separation is to deny the Gospel itself and to put into question the death of Christ.\nAccording to Wright, this letter speaks of the death of Christ as the event that declares the \u0026ldquo;present evil age\u0026rdquo; (which held people captive) null and void, and now launches the \u0026ldquo;age to come\u0026rdquo; which belongs to the delivered people of God (243). Therefore, recognizing Jesus as the Messiah \u0026ndash; their representative who bears the curse of their own law \u0026ndash; gives the Jew a \u0026ldquo;radical new identity\u0026rdquo;, a \u0026ldquo;messianic identity\u0026rdquo; (244) as Paul exclaims: \u0026ldquo;It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me\u0026rdquo; (2:20).\nCorinthians # In the First Letter to the Corinthians, Wright notes that Paul draws various applications from the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; death, but, \u0026ldquo;nowhere does Paul say explicitly what the goal of the Messiah\u0026rsquo;s death really was or by what means that death achieved that goal\u0026rdquo; (247). However, according to Wright, Paul \u0026ldquo;assumes that Passover is always the context within which that death would find its ultimate meaning\u0026rdquo; (247). This is seen best in Chapter 10-11 as he gives instructions of the Lord\u0026rsquo;s supper, which, obviously, has the Passover as its direct context. Another example would be when Paul exhorts the people to leave behind the old patterns of life, \u0026ldquo;cleanse out the old leaven\u0026rdquo; because \u0026ldquo;Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed\u0026rdquo; (5:7).\nThe Second Letter to the Corinthians, Wright says, is quite different from the first. Paul \u0026ldquo;had been utterly crushed by events in Ephesus\u0026rdquo; and so this is a letter written in suffering and as a defense of his own apostleship which was put into question. His \u0026ldquo;ministry, his style, his methods and particularly his suffering\u0026rdquo; (249) led a rival group of teachers to \u0026ldquo;pour scorn\u0026rdquo; on Paul. I have always loved this letter so much and Wright\u0026rsquo;s laboring to synthesize Paul\u0026rsquo;s message in this letter makes me love it even more. As Paul mounts his defense, Wright notes, he affirms that the Crucifixion of the Messiah isn\u0026rsquo;t just a one-off event in the past; or a mere \u0026ldquo;mechanism\u0026rdquo; through which we are saved, but:\nPrecisely because the Messiah\u0026rsquo;s crucifixion unveiled the very nature of God himself at work in generous self-giving love to overthrow all power structures by dealing with the sin that had given them their power, that same divine nature would now be at work through the ministry of the gospel not only through what was said, but through the character and circumstances of the people who were saying it. (251)\nIn other words, since Christ\u0026rsquo;s victory was through love, suffering and humility, the same \u0026ldquo;cruciform\u0026rdquo; pattern of life (as opposed to the \u0026ldquo;flashy\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;spectacular\u0026rdquo; patterns which others were looking for in an apostle) ought to mark our lives and ministries. Here again, Wright identifies a \u0026ldquo;covenant of vocation\u0026rdquo; through the death of Christ, \u0026ldquo;For the love of Christ controls us\u0026rdquo; (5:14) and gives us \u0026ldquo;a ministry of reconciliation\u0026rdquo; (5:18). Wright will come back to these ideas in the last section of the book.\nPhilippians # The obvious focus in this part for Wright was the well known \u0026ldquo;Christ Hymn\u0026rdquo; found in 2:6-11. Wright thinks that the message found in this passage is similar to what we\u0026rsquo;ve been discussing all along, namely, that even as the cross clearly stands at the center of this passage, it\u0026rsquo;s also the means by which the powers of the world were overthrown. Even though it doesn\u0026rsquo;t tell us how, every knee bows now \u0026ldquo;at the name of Jesus\u0026rdquo;. The cruciform pattern of life we saw in the Second letter to the Corinthians, is what we\u0026rsquo;re told through this passage to emulate: even Christ \u0026ldquo;wins\u0026rdquo;, so to speak, over that power, by refusing to do what would be intuitively done to \u0026ldquo;exploit one\u0026rsquo;s status for one\u0026rsquo;s own benefit\u0026rdquo; (256). Likewise, we\u0026rsquo;re to emulate Christ\u0026rsquo;s example as Paul said earlier in 2:2-4 by \u0026ldquo;being of the same mind, having the same love\u0026rdquo; as that which was shown on the cross by our Savior.\nColossians # The key passage from this letter is in 2:13-15. Here, Wright notes, there\u0026rsquo;s no doubt: Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death meant a victory over \u0026ldquo;rulers and authorities\u0026rdquo;, whether visible (Herod, Caesar, the governors, and the priests) or invisible (dark powers standing behind the visible rulers). The Jewish law that, as Wright says, \u0026ldquo;kept non-Jews out of the reckoning and had pronounced condemnation for disobedience on the Jews themselves\u0026rdquo; has been done away with (259). There\u0026rsquo;s a mission; specifically the \u0026ldquo;Gentile mission\u0026rdquo; which was previously unthinkable (259).\nRomans # There is a reason why some have suggested that Romans is the most important letter ever written. I tend to agree. Wright, knowing this well, dedicates almost 90 pages to a brief overview of this letter as he defends the views already expressed this far. Rather than trying to outline Wright\u0026rsquo;s argument (which would most likely be a very long and separate article in an already very long series of articles) I\u0026rsquo;ll only mention a couple of things that stood out for me in regards to Wright\u0026rsquo;s arguments, concerns, and methods:\nThe \u0026ldquo;Romans Road\u0026rdquo; and the \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo;: It goes without saying that if you\u0026rsquo;re a proponent of a \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo; reading of the Bible, most of your arguments will be grounded in the book of Romans most especially in the first four chapters; commonly referred to as the \u0026ldquo;Romans road\u0026rdquo;. It can be summarized as this:\nGod requires perfect obedience; all fail, and sin; all must die; Jesus dies in our place; we are forgiven and assured of going to heaven. We have no goodness\u0026hellip;of our own, but God conveys, reckons, or otherwise grants to believers a different righteousness\u0026hellip;He takes their sin; they take his \u0026ldquo;righteousness\u0026rdquo;. In some versions of the theory, the \u0026ldquo;righteousness of Christ\u0026rdquo; also includes his perfect obedience, his keeping of the law, which is then \u0026ldquo;reckoned\u0026rdquo; to believers.\nWright is against such a reading of Romans and shows some problems that come with it in the relevant texts. According to Wright, if, for example, you read 3:21-26 (a very important passage) this way, you\u0026rsquo;ll have to leave the following verses 27-31 \u0026ldquo;stranded\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;the entire chapter 4 becomes seriously undervalued\u0026rdquo; (301). This, as Wright labors to show in much detail, would also ignore what 2:17-20 had plainly said and all comes as a consequence of a wrong assumption that in Paul\u0026rsquo;s mind, a moral failure is the heart of our problem whereas for Paul, it\u0026rsquo;s clearly an idolatry/worship issue as found in 1:18-23.\nFor Wright, bringing back God\u0026rsquo;s faithfulness to the covenant he made with Abraham at the forefront; the divine purpose through Israel for the world (rather than mechanism of how \u0026ldquo;we get right with God\u0026rdquo; in order to \u0026ldquo;go to heaven\u0026rdquo;), the reading of the letter will drastically change. Leaving Israel out of the story (we sinned, God sent Jesus to die for us, we are now saved. No mention of Israel) means you\u0026rsquo;re implying that God has \u0026ldquo;jettisoned the covenant with Israel\u0026rdquo; and invented a new plan in Jesus (311). The inevitable consequence, according to Wright, is, in order to make our reading fit the texts, we end up superimposing later, and most times, foreign themes unto the text and if done long enough, we\u0026rsquo;ll be in a danger of no longer being able to hear what \u0026ldquo;Saint Paul really said\u0026rdquo; to his original audience. This is a bold claim.\nOn methods and tools: As Wright tries to reconfigure our vision of Romans, things got quite technical, and some of it seemed, in my opinion, a bit suspicious. For example, while many translations render 3:24-25 as \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip;Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith\u0026rdquo;, Wright suggests that it should have been said that \u0026ldquo;God put forth Jesus as the place of mercy\u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo;. This sounded a bit odd because I thought no other translation renders the verse in this way, but, thankfully the NET and CSB versions agree with him. This is not an isolated instance. Wright resorts to bringing issues with translations of the Greek terms dikaiosýnē, apolýtrōsis, dikaioutai, pistis\u0026hellip;and other terms having to do with \u0026ldquo;covenant justice\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;righteousness\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;justification\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;redemption\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;faith\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;fidelity\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;faithfulness\u0026rdquo;.\nAnother case to note was the rendering of 2 Corinthians 5:21 (a key text on discussions about imputation) where Wright\u0026rsquo;s translation seems to stand on its own. Many versions render it as \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip;so that we might become the righteousness of God\u0026rdquo;, but Wright\u0026rsquo;s says \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip;so that we might embody God\u0026rsquo;s faithfulness to the covenant\u0026rdquo;. As I don\u0026rsquo;t know any Greek, I\u0026rsquo;m not in a position to comment on this and however fascinating it was to see how pre-existing theology biases are inescapable when translating these ancient texts, it felt as though Wright was asking a bit much from his readers, many of whom I suppose do not know any Greek, by expecting them not only to follow but abandon these familiar and popular English translations that often disagree with him. On the other hand however, it is understandable that sometimes this technical discussion is unavoidable (especially for texts like Romans 3:25 as evidenced by this wide variety of renderings) even though it all throws the lay person in a bit of confusion.\nIn addition, this appeal to translations and technical Greek terminology seems to suggest, perhaps unintentionally, that certain readings, even if arising from \u0026ldquo;questionable\u0026rdquo; translation choices, might still sustain a kind of \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo; interpretation that is possibly faithful to the text. This, in turn, led me to wonder (and this is what felt suspicious to me) whether, in his strong opposition to the \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo;, Wright may have gone too far in resisting what some passages may be saying quite plainly. For instance, as Wright rejects that God is like the angry and capricious pagan deities that need to be appeased, it seems that he also rejects what many others think is a biblical idea: \u0026ldquo;Propitiation\u0026rdquo; , defined as \u0026ldquo;averting the wrath of God by the offering of a gift\u0026rdquo;. Much here seems to hinge on the translation of the word hilastḗrion (in this verse and elsewhere in Hebrews and 1John).\nWright labors hard to bring back what, according to him, is the correct way to read the book of Romans. He first rejects the normal division of the book that misses Paul\u0026rsquo;s main point in saying that Chapters 1-4 is about \u0026ldquo;justification\u0026rdquo; and chapters 5-8 to be about \u0026ldquo;sanctification\u0026rdquo;. Wright suggests that rather than thinking that the letter divides at this point in chapters 5-8 moving from the \u0026ldquo;problem of sin\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;how God dealt with it\u0026rdquo; to other topics, we should see this part as part of a large-scale exposition of the \u0026ldquo;new Exodus\u0026rdquo; (271). What Paul says in the opening chapters (especially in 3:21-26) receive their full exposition in chapters 6-8. Those who are baptized must consider themselves that they died, the kind of death which was like the passing of the Israelites through the Red Sea and those who were redeemed must remember that they\u0026rsquo;ve left the old world of slavery (\u0026ldquo;Egypt\u0026rdquo;) behind as they\u0026rsquo;re on the way home to their inheritance (277). They were slaves, \u0026ldquo;sold under sin\u0026rdquo;, as Paul says (7:14). Sin (singular) is the active, impersonal, yet powerful force that enslaved us and from which deliverance was needed, and it is what ultimately God punishes in the flesh of Jesus (8:3).\nThere\u0026rsquo;s much that can be said about what Wright says about Romans, but it is quite clear that, according to him, \u0026ldquo;Paul interprets the cross in relation to Passover: a new Passover, a new Exodus\u0026rdquo; (325). He adds this by way of summary:\nPaul is not simply offering a roundabout way of saying, \u0026ldquo;We sinned; God punished Jesus; we are forgiven.\u0026rdquo; He is saying, \u0026ldquo;We all committed idolatry; and sinned; God promised Abraham to save the world through Israel; Israel was faithless to that commission; but God has put forth the faithful Messiah, his own self-revelation, whose death has been our Exodus from slavery.\u0026rdquo; (347)\nConclusion # I\u0026rsquo;m sure that there are many who, like me, struggled through this section, especially the two chapters on the Book of Romans. Wright dedicated an entire chapter just to go through the dense passage found in Romans 3:21-26 as it is what many see as the \u0026ldquo;beating heart of Romans 1-4\u0026rdquo; and therefore a very (if not the most) important passage in explaining the meaning of the cross. The walk through this passage, and the letter in general, was not linear. There was much back and forth, and it felt disorienting. However, Wright warned, even from the start, using a \u0026ldquo;Narnia\u0026rdquo; analogy, that reading Romans sometimes feels like that: it is a wonderful story, but it\u0026rsquo;s hard to keep it all fresh in memory. I\u0026rsquo;d recommend reading the letter straight through a couple of times so as to be able to breeze through what Wright has to say. You\u0026rsquo;ll find that Romans is indeed a glorious book, and, as Wright said elsewhere, he\u0026rsquo;d have accomplished his goal if he gets us to go back to read the texts by ourselves.\nThat said, if you read Romans for yourself, you\u0026rsquo;ll find that Wright only scratched the surface of the letter and wish he had written an entire book on it; after all, as he repeats (some would say ad nauseam), we have misunderstood it and so, we need to read and interpret it afresh. I found that I agreed with what Wright had to say on many occasions. Other times, I was not entirely convinced or not in agreement. To be fair though, there were many passages that were unaddressed \u0026ndash; some of which seemed at odds with his arguments. But overall, this, as most of what Wright writes, was definitely a stimulating read, and I can honestly appreciate his effort to find and keep Paul\u0026rsquo;s main argument in focus while not (unintentionally) making the mistake of missing the forest for the trees.\n","date":"26 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/the-day-the-revolution-began-part-4/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion in Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters.","title":"The Day the Revolution Began - Part IV","type":"reviews"},{"content":" We have Platonized our eschatology (substituting \u0026ldquo;souls going to heaven\u0026rdquo; for the promise of new creation) and have therefore moralized our anthropology (substituting a qualifying examination of moral performance for the biblical notion of the human vocation) with the result that we have paganized our soteriology, our understanding of \u0026ldquo;salvation\u0026rdquo; (substituting the idea of \u0026ldquo;God killing Jesus to satisfy his wrath\u0026rdquo; for the genuinely biblical notions we are about to explore) (147)\nIntroduction # Up until now, we\u0026rsquo;ve only gone through the \u0026ldquo;stories of Israel\u0026rdquo; as they\u0026rsquo;re handed down to us in the Old Testament and N.T. Wright sought to make sense of some key plots therein that the first century Christians most certainly used as their foundation of their Atonement theology. Christ himself, as he appeared to the two disciples on the Road to Emmaus, \u0026ldquo;began with Moses and with all the prophets, and explained to them the things about himself throughout the whole Bible\u0026rdquo; (Luke 24:26-27). There\u0026rsquo;s therefore a sense in which one can never understand Jesus\u0026rsquo;s work on the cross if one discards the Old Testament.\nWith all that in mind, Wright now turns to the New Testament where the story of \u0026ldquo;the revolutionary rescue\u0026rdquo; took place. He opens the section with the set of charges in the opening quote which he seeks to make plain knowing fully that people will inevitably push back. How does he go about making his case? The meaning will be unpacked in this article.\nI\u0026rsquo;d note that this section is the very heart of this book. It is quite dense and it\u0026rsquo;s the longest section of the book. I decided to break it down in two, and deal first with Wright\u0026rsquo;s treatment of the Gospels and the book of Acts and then take on his treatment of Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters in the next article.\nPlatonized, Moralized \u0026amp; Paganized Distortions # Jesus\u0026rsquo;s understanding of His own mission is one that fulfills rather than discards the whole of the Old Testament. He doesn\u0026rsquo;t, as Wright insists, tell his followers to discard the old promises about redeeming Israel for a new and \u0026ldquo;better idea\u0026rdquo; of \u0026ldquo;going to heaven when we die\u0026rdquo;, but rather, Christ explains that his suffering had to happen, as the Old Testament foretells, in order to fulfill His mission and calling (Luke 24:21-27). Was Jesus setting up a kind of \u0026ldquo;spiritualization\u0026rdquo; that \u0026ldquo;moves away from \u0026lsquo;worldly\u0026rsquo; reality into a \u0026lsquo;heavenly\u0026rsquo; dimension\u0026rdquo; (161) or is the church of the last three or four hundred years responsible for such a misreading?\nIf one, for example, takes Zechariah\u0026rsquo;s prophecy in Luke 1:68-77, was \u0026ldquo;the salvation of the people through the forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo; supposed to mean a mechanism for going to heaven? If that is the case, in what sense would that be a fulfillment of Old Testament promises to David, Abraham and the national deliverance mentioned? What about Simeon\u0026rsquo;s greeting to Jesus in Luke 2:30-32? In what sense would the glory of Israel as a nation be revealed to the nations if only the new idea of \u0026ldquo;going to heaven\u0026rdquo; was in view?\n\u0026ldquo;Forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo; as Wright argues, is to be thought of in relation to the theme of \u0026ldquo;return from exile\u0026rdquo;, as we\u0026rsquo;ve discussed in the previous chapter. Whenever the nation of Israel rebelled in the Old Testament, it was sent into exile, and forgiveness meant that their rebellion/sin was dealt with and they\u0026rsquo;d be enabled to return from the exile. Therefore, there is a \u0026ldquo;national\u0026rdquo; and, consequently, a \u0026ldquo;cosmic\u0026rdquo; sense to forgiveness. However, Wright makes sure to point out that forgiveness of sins is to be thought of both on a \u0026ldquo;large, national scale and the small, personal level\u0026rdquo; (153).\nWhat is the \u0026ldquo;goal\u0026rdquo; of God\u0026rsquo;s rescue operation as accomplished through Jesus, Wright asks (158)? If Paul in Romans 8 is right, then there\u0026rsquo;s a new creation to be born, and, as he alludes to the Exodus story, there\u0026rsquo;s a liberation from its slavery to corruption and sharing of the freedom that comes when God\u0026rsquo;s children are glorified (157). That goal has a \u0026ldquo;cosmic\u0026rdquo; aspect to it. If the goal is of a \u0026ldquo;disembodied heaven\u0026rdquo; then, in what way is Jesus death in \u0026ldquo;accordance with the scriptures\u0026rdquo;? Where do we see an Old Testament ultimate hope for a \u0026ldquo;disembodied heaven\u0026rdquo;? This is the Platonized eschatology problem that Wright identifies and seeks to get rid of.\nThis wrong goal (Platonized eschatology) creates a wrong purpose: that is, if people are to watch out so that they end up where \u0026ldquo;good\u0026rdquo; people are supposedly meant to go (heaven), then the purpose of life becomes truncated to be only about our morals \u0026ndash; hence the \u0026ldquo;moralized anthropology\u0026rdquo; charge. Even if we say that we all failed an (arbitrary) moral test and that we have good news in the fact that the \u0026ldquo;goodness of Jesus\u0026rdquo; is reckoned to our account, then, as Wright asks, what then do we do with our initial human vocation of \u0026ldquo;royal priesthood\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;kingdom and priests\u0026rdquo; (Rev. 5:9-10)? If we end up with Jesus\u0026rsquo;s moral status anyway, what do we then live for in the meantime? Did God really call us to pass a moral test?\nWright is careful to note that the covenant of vocation certainly includes an aspect of moral behavior. The priesthood to which we\u0026rsquo;re called is one that preaches \u0026ldquo;repentance\u0026rdquo; and the forsaking of \u0026ldquo;wicked deeds\u0026rdquo;. That\u0026rsquo;s a given. However, what he argues is that we should not put this as the center of our calling. We turn from wickedness to and for something else! We do not repent for the sake of repenting, but we do so because we are called to an \u0026ldquo;active, involved role within God\u0026rsquo;s future world, anticipated by an equivalent active, involved role within God\u0026rsquo;s present creation\u0026rdquo; (159). Yes, we morally failed, but we failed as people who were first given a vocation; and the vocation we failed to fulfill cannot itself be reduced to the moral \u0026ndash; would that even make sense?\nIt\u0026rsquo;s in this sense that Wright argues that if the ultimate \u0026ldquo;goal\u0026rdquo; is changed, then what we believe to be the human vocation would also change and if we\u0026rsquo;re to recover the ultimate goal, then something about our calling that was lost will also be recovered. \u0026ldquo;Adjust one, and we must adjust them all\u0026rdquo; (159).\nWith that in mind, Wright goes on and seeks to prove that the book of Acts shows us that there was a \u0026ldquo;covenant of vocation\u0026rdquo; intended for us initially, and that what Jesus\u0026rsquo; death produced is a community of God\u0026rsquo;s people who worship and witness \u0026ndash; a reality that ultimately points back to our calling of \u0026ldquo;royal priesthood\u0026rdquo;. How does it work?\nActs: The Cross-Shaped Kingdom # If, as Jesus confirms, the hope of \u0026ldquo;restoration of the Kingdom to Israel\u0026rdquo; was not abandoned for \u0026ldquo;better ideas\u0026rdquo;, what might the fulfillment of this promise look like? According to Wright, the answer many Jews of that period would have provided would have been threefold. And it\u0026rsquo;s Wright\u0026rsquo;s opinion that the book of Acts shows how these three things in particular came into being (160).\nIsrael must be set free from the domination of pagan overlords: One would imagine that the book of Acts has nothing to say about this particular point, but there shouldn\u0026rsquo;t be any doubt that Luke, as Wright says, saw this new community of believers as the \u0026ldquo;liberated, redeemed people, those in and for whom the long-awaited promise of rescue from pagan overlords had been fulfilled\u0026rdquo; (165). This is closely related to the next point in that the ultimate weapon of every tyrant and the ultimate exile was dealt with in Jesus himself, and therefore, these new believers were the most free people. Israel\u0026rsquo;s God, through the agency of the Messiah, would become the ruler of the whole world: God\u0026rsquo;s word grew and multiplied, as Luke tells us numerous times, and there\u0026rsquo;s nothing that the \u0026ldquo;kingdoms of the world\u0026rdquo; could do to change that; the persecution of the church only accelerated it \u0026ndash; death had no power over it. Whether Herod Agrippa I, or Cesar himself, God\u0026rsquo;s kingdom was already inaugurated and therefore was unstoppable. Wright sees the job of the witness to be of announcing a new state of affairs; and we see through Acts that announcement going farther and farther from Jerusalem where it began to, as it were, the ends of the world. Those who witnessed, even though announcing \u0026ldquo;the forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo; (as defined previously), were not spared from beatings, imprisonment or stoning; as Jesus warns, the tools of the powers of the world had to be shown incapable and ineffective against God\u0026rsquo;s kingdom. God\u0026rsquo;s own Presence would come to dwell with his people enabling them to worship him fully and truly: Wright sees Acts describing a \u0026ldquo;new-Temple\u0026rdquo; reality of the coming together of heaven and earth (161). We now have a part of \u0026ldquo;earth\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash;the human body of Jesus\u0026ndash; now fully and thoroughly at home in \u0026ldquo;heaven\u0026rdquo; and again when the Spirit descends on the disciples. The purpose of the temple in Jerusalem is now done away with, replaced by \u0026ldquo;Jesus himself and his Spirit-filled people\u0026rdquo;. The life of worship in Israel takes a new turn in Acts and suddenly focuses on the new pattern of life of this new community centering upon \u0026ldquo;the teaching of the apostles and the common life, the breaking of bread and the prayers\u0026rdquo; (Acts 2:42). There\u0026rsquo;s a new configuration at work and God\u0026rsquo;s powerful presence, through his Spirit, is indeed with his people. Wright notes that it\u0026rsquo;s not incidental that many controversies in the book focus on temples: Stephen, Paul in Acts 14, temples in Athens and Ephesus in Acts 17-19, the Jerusalem temple itself in Acts 21:28-29; 24:6; 25:8. Jesus\u0026rsquo;s Special Passover # There are so many books on the \u0026ldquo;Atonement\u0026rdquo; published to date, but \u0026ldquo;none\u0026rdquo;, as far as Wright recalls, \u0026ldquo;starts with Jesus himself\u0026rdquo; (170). Many would jump right into Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters and only refer back to the Gospels as the \u0026ldquo;backstory\u0026rdquo;, but most of them will not start with Jesus himself in their effort to trace the meaning of His own death and they do not \u0026ldquo;engage in deep or detail reflection as to how the actual story told by the four evangelists in their different ways might contribute to an understanding of the theological meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo;s crucifixion\u0026rdquo; (171). Isn\u0026rsquo;t he right about this?\nHow then should we go about it? Well, the Gospels tell us plainly that on the day Jesus was crucified, no one expected it; there was no immediate exclamation that Jesus died for our sins \u0026ldquo;in accordance with the scriptures\u0026rdquo;. The meaning of the crucifixion that day carried the \u0026ldquo;depressingly normal\u0026rdquo; meaning that \u0026ldquo;Roman justice was once again stamping out any sign of dissent\u0026rdquo; (173). However, on the third day, when Jesus came back, bodily, and had not gone to heaven disembodied, we find the \u0026ldquo;beginnings of the interpretation of the crucifixion\u0026rdquo; (176). No one comes back from the dead; and everyone around that time knew that:\nIf the prison door is standing open, someone must have unlocked it, perhaps overpowering the guards in the process. Something about Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death seems to have had that effect. (176)\nLet us first backtrack for a little bit. In the Gospels, we find mainly Jesus announcing God\u0026rsquo;s kingdom and, as Wright suggests, it\u0026rsquo;s only fair to ask ourselves if that had anything to do with \u0026ldquo;the ancient Jewish expectations on the one hand, and his imminent death on the other\u0026rdquo; (179). Was Jesus \u0026ldquo;redrawing\u0026rdquo; the first century Jewish \u0026ldquo;kingdom\u0026rdquo; expectations around His own calling? Isn\u0026rsquo;t announcing the kingdom of God announcing that God is at last \u0026ldquo;overthrowing dark powers\u0026rdquo; that enslave his people? Isn\u0026rsquo;t it, in one way or the other, announcing God\u0026rsquo;s rescue? What can be said, as the Gospels make it plain, of Jesus\u0026rsquo;s choice of the Passover festival as the right time for him to die?\nJesus\u0026rsquo;s choice of the Passover was deliberate and not incidental as he could have chosen any other festival, most notably, the \u0026ldquo;day of the Atonement\u0026rdquo; (Leviticus 16). However, even as one reads the passion narratives, it is very clear that Jesus\u0026rsquo;s choice of the Passover is very intentional. In fact, Wright regards it as a \u0026ldquo;fixed point\u0026rdquo; that \u0026ldquo;Jesus himself understood what was about to happen to him in connection with Israel\u0026rsquo;s ancient Passover\u0026rdquo; tradition. There are many ways we can envision this. If the point of the Exodus is so that Israel might go and worship their God, then Christ\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;new Exodus\u0026rdquo; might imply \u0026ldquo;some kind of renewal or even replacement of the present Temple\u0026rdquo; (182). What of the Passover meal? Wright says:\nInstead of looking back fifteen hundred years or so to the great event of the Exodus from Egypt \u0026ndash;though that inevitably remained in the forefront of everyone\u0026rsquo;s mind on that day \u0026ndash; he turned the meal around so that its primary significance looked forward to what was going to happen the next day. (182)\nReflecting on the Exodus from Egypt in parallel with Jesus\u0026rsquo;s crucifixion, one cannot but think that Jesus had in mind that his death was going to accomplish a similar (if not a deeper) liberation of his people from some sort of slavery and bring about the ultimate defeat of the \u0026ldquo;dark powers\u0026rdquo;. The meal at the Last Supper is especially highly evocative, that Wright submits (in my opinion, rightly) that this is the \u0026ldquo;interpretative grid that Jesus himself chose and structured\u0026rdquo; (185). John calls him \u0026ldquo;the lamb of God\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; which could signify, in other words, the Passover lamb. As it should now be obvious, Wright continues to note that Jesus, even with this Passover context in mind, was going, through his death, to bring a new Exodus which in turn will bring about the real \u0026ldquo;return from exile\u0026rdquo; and the ultimate \u0026ldquo;forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo;. Remember the words that Jesus said over the cup: \u0026ldquo;This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo; (Matthew 26:28).\nThe Story of the Rescue # What else can be said about what the four evangelists wrote? What did they have to say about the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; death? We can say with confidence that they all wrote about \u0026ldquo;God returning at last\u0026rdquo;. The nativity stories are filled with prophecies of the coming of Emmanuel, God with us. YHWH himself was \u0026ldquo;becoming flesh\u0026rdquo; and dwelling with man. The evangelists were sure they were writing the incredible story of God\u0026rsquo;s glory revealed in his \u0026ldquo;son\u0026rdquo;, dwelling once again with his people, and this time, never to leave again; to remain \u0026ldquo;to the end of the age\u0026rdquo; as Matthew writes.\nHowever, it was not at all rosy. Even as Jesus was still a baby, we have hostile forces (Herod) rising up to kill. As Wright writes, the storm clouds gathered as early as that. As his ministry launched, there was a build up of opposition against his message especially as they witnessed his actions connected to the law, temple and the Sabbath. Christ\u0026rsquo;s message of \u0026ldquo;the kingdom of God\u0026rdquo; no doubt faced criticism and incredible resistance, some of it, spiritual in nature. Wright says:\nThis was how evil was gathering itself together, drawing itself up to its full height, so that Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death, when it came, would be causally and not (as it were) merely theologically linked to the tidal wave of evil. (204)\nTherefore, put simply, the evangelists wrote of the story of how \u0026ldquo;evil gathered\u0026rdquo; itself and was ultimately overthrown by the Messiah; they wrote of what happened when Satan (indeed the \u0026ldquo;ruler of this world\u0026rdquo;) was dethroned and how Jesus was enthroned \u0026ndash; He is after all, the one who now claims authority in heaven and on earth.\nOne thing I have to note is, before I picked this book, I had read some reviews that accused Wright of denying the doctrine of \u0026ldquo;Penal Substitutionary Atonement\u0026rdquo; (PSA). It would be really sad for Wright and indeed very concerning for his theology, because denying PSA would demand either discarding much of what the Bible says or else adopt a strange reading of scriptures. Even the story itself has Jesus dying instead of Barabbas, the righteous for the sinner; meaning that I don\u0026rsquo;t even see how one would be able to extricate the doctrine from the stories, let alone the following epistles.\nFortunately, the accusation is not true. Not only does Wright give many examples showing that the idea of \u0026ldquo;substitution\u0026rdquo; is apparent in many instances in the Gospels, whether from events that happened, parables or teachings; Wright also makes it clear, at the end of this section (210-225), that there\u0026rsquo;s clearly a punishment (Penal) that Jesus took on in our place (substitution). Christ bears the punishment that He himself marked out for the \u0026ldquo;impenitent nation\u0026rdquo;. For Wright, this is the reason why evil had to focus and draw itself up to its full height: it\u0026rsquo;s so as to inflict a deadly blow on the Son of God. That was the intention of the dark forces. What was God\u0026rsquo;s intention? He writes that \u0026ldquo;Jesus, by taking upon himself the weight of Israel\u0026rsquo;s sin and thereby the world\u0026rsquo;s sins, dies under the accumulated force of evil, so that now at last the kingdom can come in its fullness\u0026rdquo; (217).\nTherefore, after reading this section, I don\u0026rsquo;t see how one can come out saying that Wright denies PSA. Perhaps the false accusation comes because Wright critiques some aspects of the traditional formulation of the doctrine, especially the way the \u0026ldquo;Wrath of God\u0026rdquo; is often mistaken as what ultimately moves God: this lies at the heart of the above charge, that we have \u0026ldquo;paganized\u0026rdquo; our soteriology in that an angry deity, just like in pagan religions, must be appeased for the world to be saved. Wright is totally opposed to any view that is even remotely similar to this. In whichever case, Wright doesn\u0026rsquo;t deny the doctrine but affirms it (I should add, in his own way). I think more should be said in this regard in the next part of the book.\nFinal Remarks # In his constant opposition of the \u0026ldquo;going-to-heaven-when-we-die\u0026rdquo; type of preaching, it felt as though N.T. Wright swung the pendulum so far to the other extreme end of almost denying that there\u0026rsquo;s any truth to it. He\u0026rsquo;s careful to note that even though there are mentions of this \u0026ldquo;heaven\u0026rdquo; in the gospels, it\u0026rsquo;s to be taken as an \u0026ldquo;interim state and blissful garden of refreshment prior to that final destination\u0026rdquo; (214). Even if it were true that heaven isn\u0026rsquo;t the ultimate destination, would it not be going too far to say, as he does, that the four evangelists have virtually nothing to say about the subject? Is Wright afraid of having any hint of \u0026ldquo;platonized\u0026rdquo; eschatology in his teaching that he ended up with an over-correcting theology?\nMore to this point; haven\u0026rsquo;t you heard it preached that Jesus spoke about \u0026ldquo;hell\u0026rdquo; more than anyone else in the Bible? I certainly have. And, if I understand this book well, Wright is totally opposed to this. He says that in many instances when we think that Jesus is talking about hell, He is really telling his fellow Jews about the coming judgment, of \u0026ldquo;Roman troops and falling buildings within Jerusalem\u0026rdquo; (AD 70). Wright acknowledges one exception to this in Luke (when Christ warns his disciples to fear, above else, the one who can throw people into \u0026ldquo;hell\u0026rdquo;) but he\u0026rsquo;s convinced that other times, we\u0026rsquo;re only misreading, as is the case for, according to him, the Tower of Siloam warning (Luke 13:1-5), the parable of the tenants (Luke 20:9-19), the sayings of the hen and chicks (Luke 13:34) and the dry twigs (Luke 23:31). Even if this was true, we have other sayings, which in my opinion, are clearly meant to be about eternal punishment/judgment and how we should indeed fear it, especially as it is characterized as a place \u0026ldquo;where their worm does not die and fire is not quenched\u0026rdquo; (Mark 9:48). Should we think of these also in terms of the coming fall of Jerusalem? If these sayings are truly about eternal punishment, shouldn\u0026rsquo;t they be of any import in our theology?\nThis brings me to what some reviewers have suggested, that Wright seems to minimize the \u0026ldquo;Wrath of God\u0026rdquo;. On a positive note, I think Wright is right to keep the love of God at the forefront when talking about what moves God to come to our rescue. Even if some people say that Wright keeps trying to correct an imbalance caused by the fact that the Wrath of God is over-emphasized in our pulpits when in fact it\u0026rsquo;s not true, I have to admit that in some circles, the volume on God\u0026rsquo;s wrath is so much higher that one can scarcely hear that of God\u0026rsquo;s love. This is where I appreciate Wright\u0026rsquo;s contribution in this aspect, and, in fact, there were times when he said glorious things in this regard prompting me to exclaim that God truly \u0026ldquo;loved the world that He gave his only Son\u0026rdquo; (John 3:16). Love is what ultimately moves God to suffer and die! So I\u0026rsquo;m with Wright on this one.\nHowever, we know that the punishment that Jesus takes upon himself, as Wright himself says, was \u0026ldquo;marked out by God himself\u0026rdquo;. Even though he (rightly) keeps us focused on why God comes to suffer for us, I empathized with Wright\u0026rsquo;s critics when they imply that he\u0026rsquo;s almost muting the fact that it\u0026rsquo;s God\u0026rsquo;s wrath that is behind the judgment that Jesus is about to take upon himself. See what I mean by swinging the pendulum so far to the other end? Couldn\u0026rsquo;t forgetting, or willingly muting God\u0026rsquo;s wrath create some distortion as well? I\u0026rsquo;m eager to know what Wright has to say about Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters in general, and hopefully in particular about this very point.\nIn any case, this was, overall, a wonderful section. If it produced in me a burning desire to read and re-read the Gospels over and over again and be mastered by them, isn\u0026rsquo;t that alone worth being thankful for? Either way, this was a fruitful journey and I can\u0026rsquo;t wait to walk through Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters as we trace the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death on the cross.\n","date":"19 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/the-day-the-revolution-began-part-3/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion in the Gospels and the book of Acts.","title":"The Day the Revolution Began - Part III","type":"reviews"},{"content":" \u0026ldquo;For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures.\u0026rdquo; 1 Corinthians 15:3\nKey Texts: Isaiah 40-55; Daniel 2,7 and 9; Ezekiel 10-11 and 43.\n1. Introduction # N.T. Wright\u0026rsquo;s burden throughout this entire section is to understand in what sense the death of Christ was understood to be \u0026ldquo;in accordance with the Scriptures\u0026rdquo;. What has the story of Israel as we see it in the Old Testament, \u0026ldquo;with its twists and turns and dark mysteries, got to do with Jesus\u0026rsquo;s death and the meaning it had for his first followers?\u0026rdquo; (93) Can this sense be recovered?\nThis is where a familiarity of the main stories of the Old Testament are required to go through this second part of the book. I\u0026rsquo;d recommend re-reading slowly the above mentioned chapters of the Bible not only to get a deep understanding of, what, according to Wright, are the key passages that kept the hope of Israel alive as they awaited their Messiah, but also to be transformed by the glory of God\u0026rsquo;s love at the center of those passages.\n2. In Accordance with the Scriptures # As one thinks through the stories of Adam, Abraham, Joseph and the Israelites in slavery in Egypt, Moses and the Exodus, David, the Temple and its later destruction as well as the Babylonian captivity; we see \u0026ldquo;detached images\u0026rdquo; that don\u0026rsquo;t seem to supply anything to our understanding of the cross. Can we recover a \u0026ldquo;thick\u0026rdquo; sense, Wright asks, as opposed to just a thin and consequently twisted sense, of what it all meant in light of how it all supplies meaning to our Atonement theology?\nWright demonstrates how the idea of \u0026ldquo;promised land\u0026rdquo; works as a kind of image of a new Eden: First, the promised land would be the place of life, as opposed to death (Deuteronomy 30). Second, the land would eventually become the place of divine Presence as shown in the tabernacle in the wilderness and later through the temple in Jerusalem. Third, Wright notes that this land was \u0026ldquo;an advance signpost for something much greater\u0026rdquo; and that the entire world was to be included (Psalm 2:3, 72, 89).\nWright says that while reading the story of Adam and that of Israel in parallel, we notice that in both cases that we do have a promise of life, but also in both cases, we have the same rejection of God\u0026rsquo;s call, and still in both cases, the subjects are exiled \u0026ndash; Adam out of the garden, and Israel in captivity, away from \u0026ldquo;the land\u0026rdquo;. Wright picks up from here to ground his definition of the word \u0026ldquo;sin\u0026rdquo; in this story \u0026ndash; that\u0026rsquo;s, of course, if we\u0026rsquo;re going to talk of \u0026ldquo;forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo;. He insists that \u0026ldquo;sin\u0026rdquo; isn\u0026rsquo;t just moral failure and that it\u0026rsquo;s not just a failure to keep seemingly arbitrary rules (although it\u0026rsquo;s also that), but that the word literally means \u0026ldquo;missing the mark\u0026rdquo;, which means that when humans \u0026ldquo;sin\u0026rdquo;, they fail at a specific vocation \u0026ndash; which is, according to Wright, \u0026ldquo;reflecting God\u0026rsquo;s wise and loving stewardship into the world\u0026rdquo;.\nIsrael was called, not simply to \u0026ldquo;keep the rules\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;to go to heaven\u0026rdquo;, but to be \u0026ldquo;a royal priesthood, to worship God and reflect his rescuing wisdom into the world\u0026rdquo; (99). For Wright, our fall was not caused by \u0026ldquo;doing wrong things\u0026rdquo; (although, in some measure, it\u0026rsquo;s also that), but ultimately, we missed the target of \u0026ldquo;worship and stewardship\u0026rdquo;, and thus \u0026ldquo;it is a vocational failure as much as what we call a moral failure\u0026rdquo; (103). The cross, then must be a way to take us back to the intended goal or calling. The cross must then somehow undo the exile that repeats itself from Genesis 3 throughout the entire Old Testament.\nWright asserts:\nIf, therefore, exile is eventually undone \u0026ndash; whatever precisely that will mean \u0026ndash; this will be both a \u0026ldquo;forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo; and a new life the other side of death \u0026ndash; and the restoration of the life-giving divine Presence (104)\n3. Divine Presence and the Forgiveness of Sins # Wright continues by expounding the theme \u0026ldquo;divine Presence\u0026rdquo; brought up previously. He reminds us of the promise God makes in 2 Samuel 7 to David that he\u0026rsquo;ll build a \u0026ldquo;house\u0026rdquo; for him, which in this case is not a building but a family, and that somehow it\u0026rsquo;ll be through a human being, David\u0026rsquo;s Son, that the promise will see its ultimate fulfillment. Was God playing tricks or word-games with David? No! Even though Solomon\u0026rsquo;s temple became, for a brief period, a place God deigned to take residence as a fulfillment to the promise made to David, that glory would depart (according to Ezekiel 10-11) and it will only be a matter of time before the building itself would be destroyed. Ezekiel 43 then tells us, fortunately, that eventually the divine glory was to return; that is after the \u0026ldquo;death of exile\u0026rdquo;. When the temple is rebuilt (marking the Second Temple period of 5th century BC to late first century AD), Wright argues that even the postexilic prophets \u0026ndash; Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi \u0026ndash; do not suppose that this new temple is as the old, since it is missing the Shekinah glory of Exodus 40, 1 Kings 8, Ezekiel 43, Isaiah 40 and 52. This new temple is still deficient in comparison, but they have a promise that the glory will return even though it hasn\u0026rsquo;t happened yet.\nWright notes this:\nModern Christians need to be reminded regularly that Jews in this period did not perceive themselves to be living within a story of an angry moralistic God who threatened people that he would send them to hell if they displeased him. Nor were they hoping that, if somehow they could make things alright, they would go to a place called \u0026ldquo;heaven\u0026rdquo; and be with God forever. Some ancient pagans thought like that; most ancient Jews did not. (113)\nWright insists that the rescue they were expecting was not from this world but within the present world (113). Only through the rescue, would they be saved from \u0026ldquo;death\u0026rdquo; of exile \u0026ndash; which is the result of sin. Wright argues that the concept of \u0026ldquo;forgiveness of sin\u0026rdquo; has, in the Old Testament, a strong corporate (as opposed to only individual) aspect and that it happens when sins are dealt with and the people, which is in this case more specifically the nation, return from exile. For more, see Lamentation 4:22, Isaiah 40:1-2, Jeremiah 31:31-34 as well as Daniel 9:24.\nIn addition, Isaiah 52:7 promises that when God returns, He\u0026rsquo;ll reign but, this time, it will be through suffering and that the people will understand it as an expression of divine covenant love.\n4. Covenant of Vocation vs Works Contract # Before talking about the \u0026ldquo;suffering\u0026rdquo; that will be the means through which the promised rescue will come, I need to go back to the first chapter in this section, where I\u0026rsquo;ve observed many people disagree with Wright. This is where he first talks about our human failure of \u0026ldquo;vocation\u0026rdquo; (as opposed to mere \u0026ldquo;moral\u0026rdquo; failure) without going much into how this fleshes out in the Scriptures. For Wright, the verse in Revelation 1:5-6 is very important; it states that Christ \u0026ldquo;loved us, and freed us from our sins by his blood, and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and father\u0026rdquo;. It\u0026rsquo;s important to understand, Wright reflects, that the Bible offers a \u0026ldquo;covenant of vocation\u0026rdquo; and not a \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo; (which is that God intended that human creatures keep a moral code if they\u0026rsquo;re to stay in the garden of Eden).\nAccording to how Wright sees this concept in the popular mind, the \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo; seems to continue even with the Mosaic law, but since no one was ever able to keep up with this, Jesus comes to \u0026ldquo;do what the law required\u0026rdquo; for us and we now have Christ\u0026rsquo;s moral status as a gift. This, Wright argues, isn\u0026rsquo;t what the Bible offers. According to him, the primary human failure is a failure of worship. It isn\u0026rsquo;t just \u0026ldquo;wrong behavior\u0026rdquo; that made us fall, although it\u0026rsquo;s also this; but at the heart of the wrong behavior was a failure to \u0026ldquo;obey\u0026rdquo; God\u0026rsquo;s calling of priesthood and image-bearing. Wright proves his point by highlighting the fact that Paul says in Romans 1:18-25 that the heart of human sin (which eventually brought God\u0026rsquo;s wrath) is idolatry; which is another way of saying \u0026ldquo;failure of worship\u0026rdquo;.\nAdditionally, he remarks (although without explanation) that there is \u0026ldquo;dark exchange\u0026rdquo; that happens when we fail in our calling to be priests; we hand over the power to \u0026ldquo;dark forces\u0026rdquo; and we get, as a result, death. In Wright\u0026rsquo;s perspective, \u0026ldquo;death\u0026rdquo; is no longer a \u0026ldquo;seeming arbitrary and somewhat draconian punishment for miscellaneous moral shortcomings\u0026rdquo;, but rather, a \u0026ldquo;direct consequence of the behavior\u0026rdquo; (86). Which means that the punishment is not arbitrary but an intrinsic result of the dark exchange.\n5. Suffering, Redemption # Now back to the theme of suffering. Wright comes right out of the gate by stating the fact that \u0026ldquo;we do not find in pre-Christian Jewish literature any suggestion of a coming Messiah who would die for the sins of the nation or the world\u0026rdquo; (121). Outside Isaiah 53, there was no major passage or understanding that taught that suffering would be the means by which the divine rescue would come. Granted, there was the idea of \u0026ldquo;messianic woes\u0026rdquo; that taught of a great suffering but which would be only the \u0026ldquo;prelude of the coming deliverance\u0026rdquo;. According to Wright, the Messiah was thought by many to be coming to win military victories. As far as he could tell, only Isaiah 53 presents the intense suffering as the means, and not simply the context, of the expected deliverance (125). Even other \u0026ldquo;suffering texts\u0026rdquo; like Psalm 22 change their initial \u0026ldquo;suffering\u0026rdquo; tone into triumph; only Isaiah 53 preserves the suffering as the means by which the deliverance would come.\nWright goes through some key extra-biblical material to try and trace Jewish thoughts about suffering just before Jesus comes on the scene. He brings up \u0026ldquo;pagan stories\u0026rdquo; of 160 BC recorded in 2 Maccabees and shows that they contain ideas about suffering, and more precisely suffering for others through the lives of Maccabean martyrs in their successful revolt against Antiochus Epiphanes. The martyr\u0026rsquo;s \u0026ldquo;sacrifice\u0026rdquo; somehow \u0026ldquo;brought to an end the sufferings of the people as a whole, which had been caused by their sins\u0026rdquo; (128). Wright follows the redemptive significance that was given to the suffering and death of Maccabean martyrs all the way to 4 Maccabees to show that you can see signs that\n\u0026quot;\u0026hellip;some people at least, under pressure of intense suffering and persecution, reached for ways of interpreting that experience not only as something through which God\u0026rsquo;s people might pass to deliverance, but as something because of which that deliverance would come about.\u0026quot; (131)\nCould that have influenced the early Christians\u0026rsquo; interpretations of their own savior\u0026rsquo;s suffering? Wright leaves the question open and finds it sufficient to only note that this thinking would have been available for the Jews of the Second Temple period (and those of Jesus\u0026rsquo;s day).\n6. Final Remarks # My appreciation for this book really deepened in this section because I deemed it to be truly dipped deep in the Old Testament. This increased my appreciation of the little phrase \u0026ldquo;according to the Scriptures\u0026rdquo; that I would otherwise recite in the Nicene creed without much thought. Before I committed to a slow reading of this book, I read reviews that criticized some of the material found in this section, especially the way Wright contrasts the \u0026ldquo;Covenant of Works\u0026rdquo; (or works contract) with his own \u0026ldquo;Covenant of Vocation\u0026rdquo;. The reproach was that his view of the \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo; is really a caricature and so it didn\u0026rsquo;t get a fair treatment. Some who\u0026rsquo;re willing to read Wright sympathetically suggest that the book would have been better if only he took a \u0026ldquo;both and\u0026rdquo; rather than an \u0026ldquo;either or\u0026rdquo; approach and not discard the \u0026ldquo;works contract\u0026rdquo; altogether.\nI\u0026rsquo;d say that I appreciate these warnings but I also appreciate Wright\u0026rsquo;s perspective and his efforts to explain this because the same caricatures he\u0026rsquo;s so against \u0026ndash; if they are caricatures at all\u0026ndash; are the same things that we hear from pulpits this side of the world. Even though critics point that there\u0026rsquo;s nothing wrong with holding the two \u0026ldquo;covenants\u0026rdquo; simultaneously, I\u0026rsquo;d appreciate if someone pointed out which framework should be emphasized over the other: that is, which, according to the Bible, should be at the root of our understanding? Or are they supposed to hold the same weight? And this is where, as a layman, I\u0026rsquo;d ask for someone to help me if they know of a book that can guide me through a fair and accurate treatment of the \u0026ldquo;covenant of works\u0026rdquo; understanding of the Old Testament that could rival Wright\u0026rsquo;s rich and colorful images he used to tie together the Pentateuch, Psalms and the Prophets in a way that makes sense.\nA key theme which, I figure, will be important in the next sections of the book is his treatment of \u0026ldquo;forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo;. His way of linking it closely with the theme of exile so prevalent in the Old Testament, from Eden all the way through the Second Temple period, was, to say the least, wonderful. When it comes to connecting seemingly unrelated dots, Wright shines. He\u0026rsquo;s the \u0026ldquo;big-picture\u0026rdquo; guy. My only reservation was that I\u0026rsquo;m not fully convinced that the average first century Jew would have had a \u0026ldquo;corporate\u0026rdquo; sense understanding of \u0026ldquo;forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo; whenever it was mentioned. Wright makes a strong case to be sure, without totally setting the personal sense on the side; but I wonder if Jews had what Wright has in mind when, for example, John the Baptist first came on the scene to preach a baptism of repentance. I guess I\u0026rsquo;d have to re-read for myself some texts in the New Testament, but I also guess that Wright plans to make it even more plain in the next sections as he especially deals with the Gospels and Acts.\nMy last remark is about Wright\u0026rsquo;s talk of the Maccabean revolt and the apocryphal literature that arose especially as it regards to their interpretations of suffering and redemption. Wright himself is not sure (or at least he doesn\u0026rsquo;t make it clear) if this intertestamental understanding of suffering was itself as a result of reading Isaiah 53 or if it imitates non-Jewish/pagan thought. If Wright wishes to include more historical material for our knowledge so that we get more first century context, then this is of course appreciated, however, let there be no insinuation (however oblique) that somehow the first Christians could have been influenced by these apocryphal writings. I hope he makes this point clear in the coming sections.\nOverall, I\u0026rsquo;m glad with the progress made in the book and I\u0026rsquo;m eager to take on the next parts.\n","date":"10 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/the-day-the-revolution-began-part-2/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"In what sense was the death of Jesus \u0026lsquo;in accordance with the Scriptures\u0026rsquo;?","title":"The Day the Revolution Began - Part II","type":"reviews"},{"content":"No soul would dare sing of redemption on that hollow Friday evening when our Lord was crucified. No voices rose to exalt the mighty victory of our Lord over rulers and authorities1; this was no picture of the overwhelming triumph for which they yearned, but yet another bleak portrait of defeat and the utter crushing of their hopes. The history of the universe pivots on these two events \u0026ndash; the Cross and the Empty Tomb \u0026ndash; yet the entire world was blind as they unfolded. Having eyes, no one was able to see \u0026ndash; truly see2.\nThere\u0026rsquo;s a kind of defect that distorts our vision and darkens our understanding. Like mirages in the desert, our cravings discolor the reality around us and invert our logic, until we mistake the abyss for the heights; and staring into the depths, we find ourselves calling them the heavens. How often do we look down on the meek, the mourner and the reviled, not being able to see that our Lord himself counts them most \u0026ldquo;blessed\u0026rdquo; 3? Don\u0026rsquo;t we often exchange true riches for that which does not profit? Have we not forsaken the fountain of living waters, and hewed out broken cisterns that can hold no water4? Setting out to find the path of comfort and pleasure, how many ended up the way of Sheol, going down the chambers of death5? Don\u0026rsquo;t we oftentimes celebrate what we should be ashamed of and cherish what is vile? What logic can explain the fact that we willingly pierce ourselves with many pangs6 instead of gazing on the one who was pierced for our transgressions7? How skewed is our vision?\nWe truly need to learn, by the help of the blessed Spirit, to see through new eyes8 \u0026ndash; His eyes \u0026ndash; and get our logic and reason turned upside down and inside out. We need a new mind altogether.\nTherefore, let us go down at the cross so that we get fresh eyes to see the crown beneath the thorns, the life bursting through the shed blood, the victory through the seeming loss, the power in weakness and surrender, the coming joy after godly suffering, the exaltation through humiliation, the supremacy of the one who seemed low and despised, the surpassing wisdom through what looked like folly, the everlasting life through what appeared to be death, and the beginning of a new creation where it appeared to be the end of all hope.\nBut God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. 1 Corinthians 1:27-29\nFor this season of lent, I\u0026rsquo;m studying through a book on the Atonement. See below, should this be of any interest and make sure to subscribe by email to get notified when new articles are published. The Day the Revolution Began Series The Day the Revolution Began - Part V Mission, Love \u0026 Conclusion 31 March 2026\u0026middot;11 mins Non Fiction Theology Concluding our Journey of \u0026lsquo;Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion\u0026rsquo;. The Day the Revolution Began - Part IV The Cross According to Paul 26 March 2026\u0026middot;15 mins Non Fiction Theology Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion in Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters. The Day the Revolution Began - Part III The Cross in the Gospels \u0026 Acts 19 March 2026\u0026middot;18 mins Non Fiction Theology Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion in the Gospels and the book of Acts. The Day the Revolution Began - Part II The Stories of Israel 10 March 2026\u0026middot;12 mins Non Fiction Theology In what sense was the death of Jesus \u0026lsquo;in accordance with the Scriptures\u0026rsquo;? The Day the Revolution Began - Part I A Layman's Review 1 March 2026\u0026middot;17 mins Non Fiction Theology Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion. Colossians 2:13-15\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nIsaiah 6:9-10\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nMatthew 5:3-11\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nJeremiah 2:13\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nProverbs 7:27\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n1 Timothy 6:10\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nIsaiah 53:5\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n1 Corinthians 2:9-10\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"5 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/the-great-inversion/","section":"Articles","summary":"Learning to see the crown beneath the thorns and the life after death.","title":"The Great Inversion","type":"articles"},{"content":" \u0026hellip;Something had happened that afternoon that had changed the world. That by six o\u0026rsquo;clock on that dark Friday evening the world was a different place. (26)\n1. Preface # Andy Naselli lectured on different \u0026ldquo;layers\u0026rdquo; of reading in this Disputatio address titled \u0026ldquo;How to Read at Different Levels\u0026rdquo;. Not every book, as he explained, requires the same level of reading, as some, partly because of the way they present themselves, require the reader to make use of \u0026ldquo;micro-reading\u0026rdquo;, which is the kind where one slows down, and applies the most serious, \u0026ldquo;careful, diligent and detailed way to read\u0026rdquo; as one tries to rigorously trace the argument of the author.\nI decided to apply this type of reading to this book and go beyond just tracing N.T. Wright\u0026rsquo;s thoughts to even dialogue and interact with his arguments. Therefore, as I embark onto a multi-part review journey of the book, I want to mention few reasons why I deemed it necessary (at least for myself):\nThe subject itself is worth the effort: it\u0026rsquo;s so high and so deep. It\u0026rsquo;s a bottomless ocean and no one will ever claim to have taken it all in. Paul says that it \u0026ldquo;surpasses knowledge\u0026rdquo; (Ephesians 3:19). I thought I\u0026rsquo;d start a tradition where I pick a serious book on the \u0026ldquo;atonement\u0026rdquo; right around the time when Lent starts and work my way through it until Easter. And why would I do that? Well, as Wright puts it eloquently, The point of trying to understand the cross better is not so that we can congratulate ourselves for having solved an intellectual crossword puzzle, but so that God\u0026rsquo;s power and wisdom may work in us, through us, and out into the world that still regards Jesus\u0026rsquo;s crucifixion as weakness and folly. (22)\nLaying my cards on the table; I do love N.T. Wright. To date, I still rank his \u0026ldquo;Jesus and The Victory of God\u0026rdquo; as well as \u0026ldquo;Surprised by Hope\u0026rdquo; as some of the best theology books I\u0026rsquo;ve ever read. Obviously, not everyone likes him the way I do, and I know he\u0026rsquo;s had a lot of pushback on much he had to say about \u0026ldquo;What Saint Paul really said.\u0026rdquo; A while back, I remember myself being annoyed at something he said (although I don\u0026rsquo;t remember what) in his \u0026ldquo;Surprised by Scripture\u0026rdquo; that I had to put it down never to pick it up again. In any case, regardless of what one feels about him, I\u0026rsquo;ve found him to be an extremely gifted writer and a good theologian, and so I thought I should engage deeply with this work with pen in hand and an open Bible, and see if I can learn from him. I\u0026rsquo;m also, as the subtitle suggests, a layman, that is, I\u0026rsquo;ve not gone through some kind of formal theological training. I intend, at least as far as I can tell, to remain a layman for the foreseeable future. As I researched for a book to work with, I looked for one that is not too \u0026ldquo;academic\u0026rdquo; in that it shouldn\u0026rsquo;t lose me through its technical jargon or throw me in a maze of references of what previous scholars have said about the subject. On the other hand, I needed a book that doesn\u0026rsquo;t dumb things down too much, but one that especially targets readers who have a kind of familiarity with the subject but who would nevertheless be willing to put in the work to take their level of understanding up a notch. I believe theology, unlike any other discipline, is not to be left to \u0026ldquo;theologians\u0026rdquo;, because why would detailed and elaborate discussions about articles of our faith remain only with specialists? I agree with R.C. Sproul, \u0026ldquo;Everyone\u0026rsquo;s a Theologian\u0026rdquo; . I say this to be upfront about my limits in the discipline and hope to make it known if and when I struggle with a particular topic. With that said, let\u0026rsquo;s dive right in.\n2. Why the Cross? # He was on the verge of obeying, and getting the whole silly business over, when the defencelessness of the figure deterred him. The feeling was a very illogical one. Not because its hands were nailed and helpless, but because\u0026hellip;the thing, for all its realism, was inanimate and could not in any way hit back\u0026hellip; It was a picture of what happened when the Straight met the Crooked, a picture of what the Crooked did to the Straight \u0026ndash; what it would do to him if he remained straight. It was, in a more emphatic sense than he had yet understood, a \u0026ldquo;cross\u0026rdquo;. C.S. Lewis, That Hideous Strength (333)\nPulling (long) quotes from other books as one dives in the review of another book might seem a rather strange thing to do. However, I couldn\u0026rsquo;t help but think about this passage as I read through Wright\u0026rsquo;s opening chapter. In Lewis\u0026rsquo; work, we\u0026rsquo;ve got a man who, even though having no particular \u0026ldquo;spirituality\u0026rdquo; to speak of, couldn\u0026rsquo;t trample on the cross when he was required to. Something \u0026ldquo;powerful\u0026rdquo; prevented him from doing so. Wright brings up many such stories of people from various backgrounds who have found themselves recognizing a peculiar power about the cross, without the ability to explain it. Why are we so fond of centuries old hymns about a bloody and rugged cross? What\u0026rsquo;s in them and why are they so \u0026ldquo;powerful\u0026rdquo; and why can\u0026rsquo;t we ever bring ourselves to exchange them for new ones? Consider \u0026ldquo;Christian\u0026rdquo; in Pilgrim\u0026rsquo;s progress and what he experienced when his burden \u0026ldquo;loosed from off his shoulders\u0026rdquo; precisely at the moment he came down at the cross\u0026hellip; Why would a grown man like St. Paul be bold enough to say that his entire life is lived \u0026ldquo;by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me\u0026rdquo; (Gal 2:20)? All this leaves one wondering why the story of the cross carries that much power. \u0026ldquo;What kind of sense does it make to suppose that the death of one man nearly two thousand years ago, in an obscure Roman province, could have that kind of power?\u0026rdquo; (12) Wright argues that we need not know \u0026ldquo;why\u0026rdquo; before the cross can have this power and effect on us, but still, the question needs to be asked because \u0026ldquo;we observe the reality\u0026rdquo;.\nI must say, before moving on, that asking this question, as already mentioned, is not trying to \u0026ldquo;intellectualize\u0026rdquo; the spiritual (which some suppose is definitely not the way to tap into that power). It\u0026rsquo;s not wrong to ask questions and there\u0026rsquo;s nothing wrong with trying to understand. As Wright writes:\nThe aim, as in all theological and biblical exploration, is not to replace love with knowledge. Rather, it is to keep love focused upon its true object. (24)\nIt isn\u0026rsquo;t only faith that seeks understanding. Love ought to do the same; not of course in order to stop loving, but so that love may grow, mature and bear fruit. (24)\n3. 2000 Years of Interpretation # If the question is not new, then we are \u0026ldquo;only the latest in a long line of people who have wrestled with the meaning of the cross down through the years\u0026rdquo;. What has the church said about this event? What does church history teach us about the \u0026ldquo;theology of the cross\u0026rdquo;?\nAccording to Wright, the early church is one that never toned down the message of the cross. Paul himself knew not to boast in anything except in the Cross (Gal 2). Wright shows that the first Christians could have chosen to emphasize the resurrection triumph and brush over, or indeed avoid talking about the shameful cross altogether; but, thankfully they didn\u0026rsquo;t. The Gospel was often summarized as the \u0026ldquo;message of the cross\u0026rdquo;. However, in his short sketch of the church history, Wright says that much of the first centuries of Christianity was focused on sharpening the edges of the church\u0026rsquo;s doctrine of the Trinity (especially as they wrestled through questions about the divinity of Christ), which beyond any other doctrine, was under attack. He acknowledges that during this period, there are only brief mentions of what\u0026rsquo;s now known as Christus Victor and penal substitution models (notably through Athanasius in the 4th century) as well as appeals to the sacrificial imagery but nothing of a sharpened exploration compared to that of the Trinity.\nDetailed developments, according to Wright, come only later, after the split between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic, in the 11th century with Anselm of Canterbury who first articulated what\u0026rsquo;s now called the \u0026ldquo;satisfaction\u0026rdquo; theory: \u0026ldquo;God\u0026rsquo;s honor has been impugned by human sin and must be satisfied.\u0026rdquo; I appreciate Wright\u0026rsquo;s (apparent) apology for Anselm by cautioning that Anselm\u0026rsquo;s satisfaction theory must be taken in the context of the high middle ages that Anselm inhabited to be properly grasped. Wright also mentions Abelard, who developed the \u0026ldquo;moral example\u0026rdquo; theory as an alternative to Anselm\u0026rsquo;s satisfaction theory: The cross shows how much God loves us and thereby gives us strong reason to love him and one another in return. Wright is careful to state that Abelard wanted to retain \u0026ldquo;satisfaction\u0026rdquo; as well but that it\u0026rsquo;s only his later followers that made the differentiation between these two models more rigid.\nWright spends most of his time in this section talking about the 16th and 17th centuries of the Protestant Reformation and how this period was a turning point in the history of the church in general and in the history of atonement theology in particular. Wright thinks John Calvin and Martin Luther came hard against the Catholic doctrines (or heresies) of Purgatory and the Mass, and rightly so, but that we need to keep in mind that they were answering medieval questions and not necessarily our questions. It\u0026rsquo;s in this setting that what we now know as penal substitution (Jesus bearing punishment in the place of his people) as an atonement theory becomes (inevitably) overblown as an answer against the Catholic church\u0026rsquo;s heretical teachings. Because Jesus\u0026rsquo; sacrifice was a \u0026ldquo;once and for all\u0026rdquo; event according to the scriptures, Christ\u0026rsquo;s atoning work had made redundant the practice of Mass (the priest at the altar sacrificing Jesus over and over again) and so this false doctrine was to be vilified. According to the reformers, no further purification or further punishment (as taught in the doctrine of Purgatory) had biblical support because the bodily death itself of Christ is the only thing that can pay for our debts.\nPenal substitution became such a hallmark of Reformation theology and it came to color much of the century\u0026rsquo;s atonement theology. However, as Wright echoes Swiss theologian Karl Barth, he mentions that the \u0026ldquo;Reformers never sorted out what to say about the ultimate future\u0026rdquo; and in their preoccupation with our standing before God (in response to medieval questions and abuses) they \u0026ldquo;failed to challenge the larger heaven-and-hell framework itself\u0026rdquo;. Wright says this:\nIf, of course, you are faced with the medieval questions, it is better to give them biblical answers than nonbiblical ones. But the biblical texts themselves might suggest that there were better questions to be asking, which are actually screened out by concentrating on the wrong ones.\nWright acknowledges that not everyone was wrong about this, as the later 17th and 18th centuries Christians held onto a robust resurrection hope that formed part of the \u0026ldquo;Postmillennial Puritan hope\u0026rdquo;. Their movement was unfortunately only short lived, as the Enlightenment and Epicureanism of the 19th century which insist on a great gulf between heaven and earth muddied the waters. It all somehow reinforced a caricature (and indeed as Wright keeps pointing out) of a wrong story of salvation: that the story of the cross is that of going to heaven when we die, which leaves us wondering what to do with Easter, the resurrection and the unaddressed ultimate future of the world as God plans it.\nMuch of these distortions and caricatures, Wright argues, created an unbiblical message outlined as below \u0026ndash; and who wouldn\u0026rsquo;t recognize this, or at least toned down versions of this in our current time?\nAll humans sinned, causing God to be angry and to want to kill them, to burn them forever in \u0026ldquo;hell\u0026rdquo;. Jesus somehow got in the way and took the punishment instead (it helped, it seems, that He was innocent \u0026ndash; oh, and that He was God\u0026rsquo;s own son too. We are in the clear after all, heading for \u0026ldquo;heaven\u0026rdquo; instead (provided, of course, we believe it). 3.1. Appreciation \u0026amp; Remarks # Wright\u0026rsquo;s short survey of nearly two thousand years of atonement theology was fascinating, to the point of wishing he\u0026rsquo;d have gone deeper to make this a full length book on its own. In this, the great importance of history is shown, in that we need to keep contextualizing formulations of ideas (and theologies) by keeping the struggles and questions of a particular era in the forefront, thus saving us from blindly and uncritically adopting views without acknowledging where they came from.\nEven though history is important, a biblical text, as Wright said elsewhere, must be wrestled with and looked at independently from what previous theologians have said about it. It\u0026rsquo;s always good of course to know what was previously said so as not to err, but I appreciate Wright\u0026rsquo;s attitude as he dares to question even what Luther and Calvin had said before. Besides, Luther and Calvin themselves challenged long traditions of misinterpretations and one would argue that their legacy, and indeed that of the reformation itself, is one of \u0026ldquo;always reforming\u0026rdquo;.\nThat said, even though I won\u0026rsquo;t go as far as refusing to give an ear to revisionists (it\u0026rsquo;s too early to say that about Wright), I should however err on the side of caution before going full on board. This is precisely where my limits as a layman came in to frustrate, because, I should say that I did accept much of what Wright says at face value. I was aware of some of these historical facts, and many of those only vaguely. Which means that without first hand knowledge of the Patristic era literature for example, I can\u0026rsquo;t know for sure whether or not their articulation of their atonement theory was not as developed and as precise as Wright asserts. Was Wright painting with too broad a brush? I also can\u0026rsquo;t know for sure that Calvin\u0026rsquo;s view of the atonement was not as expansive as Wright wishes.\nI should think that these great theologians of the past, although still human and still fallible, gained and maintained their status for a good reason, and I\u0026rsquo;d like to think that they didn\u0026rsquo;t have such a glaring blind spot concerning a central doctrine. Regardless of the human teachers, I found it hard to believe that Reformed theology in general, while needed at the time, emphasized the wrong thing this whole time. But since I\u0026rsquo;m not so much acquainted with the primary sources, I\u0026rsquo;d totally understand if someone was reading this and was not at all happy about it, and I could see how he\u0026rsquo;d ask that Wright provide more proof if he\u0026rsquo;s going to make such claims.\nIn any case, I\u0026rsquo;m ready and willing to continue to listen to Wright\u0026rsquo;s take sympathetically, and hopefully much won\u0026rsquo;t hinge on these historical interpretations.\n4. The Cross in Its First-Century Setting # Wright moves from historical theology to history proper; the history of the first century to be precise. This was sublime. In this last chapter of the first part of the book, Wright intends to clarify what the crucifixion meant in the Greco-Roman context that Jesus inhabited. This is done so as not to simply \u0026ldquo;pass over\u0026rdquo; the cross and the brutality and horror that it evoked to the first Christians as we proceed to what we\u0026rsquo;d really like to do: (mostly) intellectual tearing apart of texts.\nThe first century minds, both Greek and Roman, were very well accustomed to the great epics like the Iliad as well as, on the Roman side, Virgil\u0026rsquo;s Aeneid . According to Wright, \u0026ldquo;it\u0026rsquo;s no accident that the greatest and best-known poems of pagan antiquity begin with words of \u0026lsquo;wrath\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;arms\u0026rsquo;\u0026rdquo; (52) and that the gods themselves shared in the wrath and urged for violence. This is certainly the backdrop against which horrible and brutal practices such as the crucifixion see their rise in the ancient world. We shouldn\u0026rsquo;t just brush and \u0026ldquo;pass over\u0026rdquo; the cruelty of the cross if we hope to ever understand the emotions it evoked. Wright brings ancient testimonies of Cicero, Seneca, Josephus as well as Origen for us to never take the shame of the cross for granted. Perhaps, I thought to myself, Mel Gibson\u0026rsquo;s The Passion of the Christ film wasn\u0026rsquo;t exaggerating after all.\nRomans, at the peak of their power, made crucifixion their own even though they didn\u0026rsquo;t invent the practice itself. Spartacus and his six thousand followers were all crucified \u0026ldquo;along the 130 miles Appian Way from Rome to Capua, making roughly one cross every forty yards.\u0026rdquo; (57) The crucifixion was a deliberate device to publicly shame those who were punished by the empire: they usually made sure to do that on busy roads or city entrances. Romans, as an example, crucified, according to Josephus, two thousand Jewish rebels sometime between AD 63 and AD 70 to counter the most serious attempt at revolt in Galilee. Jews themselves did not inflict such punishment on their own, except when Alexander Janaeus crucified 800 pharisees in 88 BC (57).\nWright goes through such examples for us to get a sense that Jesus, and by extension Jews of his day, truly lived under \u0026ldquo;the shadow of the cross\u0026rdquo;. They knew the horror, terror and shame and they certainly knew what Jesus meant when he told his followers to \u0026ldquo;pick up their own crosses and follow him\u0026rdquo;. Wright helpfully demonstrates that the early Christians gave the cross a meaning in a \u0026ldquo;Roman world\u0026rdquo; where it already had a meaning: Romans are socially superior, Romans are politically in charge and, theologically and religiously speaking, Roman\u0026rsquo;s gods are greater. This is not to say that the early Christians gave it the same meaning, but that however deep and rich and revolutionary the meaning they ended up with would be, it was indeed \u0026ldquo;in the teeth of the meanings the cross already possessed\u0026rdquo; (60).\nSo then, what did the Jews think of the cross itself? How did they interpret it to be in \u0026ldquo;accordance with the Bible\u0026rdquo;? It\u0026rsquo;s here that Wright teases out a meaning that is to be explored fully in the next part: Jews never forgot that Christ chose the festival of the Passover as the right moment to go on the cross and that their current \u0026ldquo;exile\u0026rdquo;, as Daniel 9 prophesies, will soon come to an end through the decisive deliverance through the Messiah, who ultimately brings about the \u0026ldquo;forgiveness of sins\u0026rdquo;.\nWright says that first century Jews didn\u0026rsquo;t really, as far as he could tell, have categories for a suffering Messiah. But, he helpfully notes that, \u0026ldquo;nothing in the ancient world, whether Jewish or non-Jewish, prepares us for the sudden flurry of themes and images that tumble over one another as the early Christians tried to express and interpret what had just happened to Jesus\u0026rdquo; (66).\n5. Final Remarks # Thus far, I appreciate Wright\u0026rsquo;s decision to make history our starting point for our study. I think there\u0026rsquo;s some wisdom to it, as it somehow plunges our minds into the context within which Christ lived and preached and eventually died. The question of how, given the facts about what happened, the first Christians probably felt and thought about anything is kept consistently at the forefront and I think this to be very important for us to do, if we hope to recover the meaning of the message they first preached.\nWhichever meaning we\u0026rsquo;re going to derive from this, I hope it also converges with the natural reading of the key texts because it\u0026rsquo;d be suspicious, and indeed strange, if all of a sudden we started reading texts in ways we would never have if we didn\u0026rsquo;t have this historical background. This is especially true for sacred scriptures that God himself preserved for both historians and people who\u0026rsquo;ll never have the chance to know the extra biblical material surrounding the first centuries of Christianity.\nIn any case, I truly loved this opening, and appreciate, as many people like to point out, Wright\u0026rsquo;s masterful storytelling.\nI\u0026rsquo;m under no illusion that anyone will find it worth reading my rather long notes on this book, but if you\u0026rsquo;ve somehow read this far, I\u0026rsquo;d love to hear from you 1 should this invitation be of any interest. Let me know what you\u0026rsquo;ve found helpful in my review and where you\u0026rsquo;d point me by way of helping answer questions I\u0026rsquo;ve raised. Thank you so much.\nFeel free to contact me.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"1 mars 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/the-day-the-revolution-began-part-1/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion.","title":"The Day the Revolution Began - Part I","type":"reviews"},{"content":"What better way to begin this new section on the website than taking on a book about literary criticism?\nAs I read this book, I couldn\u0026rsquo;t help but think that this must be how it felt to sit in a class where the eminent C.S. Lewis was lecturing. I loved every minute of it! Granted, some of the examples he uses come from classical authors I know virtually nothing about (Virgil, Lucretius, Lawrence, Chaucer, Spenser, Mariner, etc.), and so some things inevitably went over my head. But there weren\u0026rsquo;t many such instances and so I would encourage even those who, like me, are not well read, to pick this work up anyway.\nWhat\u0026rsquo;s good literature? What makes for a great book? This is the question that this book seeks to answer:\nIf \u0026hellip;we found even one reader to whom the cheap little book with its double columns and the lurid daub on its cover had been a lifelong delight, who had read and reread it, who would notice, and object, if a single word were changed, then, however little we could see in it ourselves and however it was despised by our friends and colleagues, we should not dare to put it beyond the pale. (108)\nFor C.S. Lewis, how often a work is reread is an index of the quality of a book. If you find that many people regularly reread a particular book, it is safe to assume that there\u0026rsquo;s something really good in it. A bad book can never compel multiple and passionate re-readings and constant love. If we find a book that everyone reads only to, say, kill time, and thereafter never to be reread, then its quality is significantly lower. What then is it that makes people want to reread books, and why is that an indicator of a good book?\nLewis, on multiple occasions, posits that \u0026ldquo;observation of how men read is a strong basis for judgment of what they read\u0026rdquo;. If you try to judge what people read and not how they read, you\u0026rsquo;ll only end up with a \u0026ldquo;flimsy\u0026rdquo; answer that won\u0026rsquo;t even work over time; that is, you\u0026rsquo;ll find yourself trying to judge \u0026rsquo;tastes\u0026rsquo; that change over time. But if you find that a particular work compelled a great number of people to read it \u0026ndash; to use his words \u0026ndash; attentively, obediently and disinterestedly, then not only do you have a great book in your hands but also, you have a more permanent way to judge works in general. Good books are therefore, according to Lewis, those that \u0026ldquo;permit, invite, or compel good reading\u0026rdquo;.\nBut what exactly is \u0026ldquo;good reading\u0026rdquo;?\nThe first demand any work of any art makes upon us is surrender. Look. Listen. Receive. Get yourself out of the way. (19)\nThere\u0026rsquo;s a tendency in all of us to \u0026ldquo;use\u0026rdquo; works of arts instead of \u0026ldquo;receive\u0026rdquo; from them, thus breaking the first rule of good reading. We see this when we want to impose our own views onto the texts rather than giving a fair listen to what the author is saying. This precisely is the behavior of \u0026ldquo;the man who talks when he should listen\u0026rdquo;. Lewis also argues that those who give no regard to fairy tales or myths because they seem \u0026ldquo;unrealistic\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;childish\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;silly\u0026rdquo; are the people who are \u0026ldquo;egoistic\u0026rdquo;, and \u0026ldquo;never get beyond themselves\u0026rdquo;. On many occasions, I have personally felt seen and rebuked when I brought in these mercenary tendencies of putting oneself at the center, and Lewis skillfully lays them out in the open by showing that these tendencies are present just as much in the \u0026ldquo;unliterary\u0026rdquo; man as in the expert critic \u0026ndash; although not in the same way.\nIf, on the other hand, a book manages to put you in a good posture, which is that of obedience and reception, then it says much about the book itself. However, the reader, even after multiple nudges from the book itself, can also resist and keep himself \u0026ldquo;busy doing things with the work that he gives it too little chance to work on him\u0026rdquo;. Lewis thus acknowledges the role and responsibility of the reader when he insists that said reader should be \u0026ldquo;obedient\u0026rdquo;.\nThis is a great book. In it, one can learn a great deal about myths, imagination, realism, poetry, fantasy, plot mechanics and how good stories/books work in general, in fact he dedicates entire chapters on some of these specific genres and literary tools showing the tendencies of good/bad readers as well as the literary/unliterary. I can only conclude by simply saying how I appreciated every bit of it and that I\u0026rsquo;d heartily recommend it.\n","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/reviews/an-experiment-in-criticism/","section":"Book Reviews","summary":"C.S. Lewis\u0026rsquo;s proposal on how to measure the quality of books.","title":"An Experiment in Criticism","type":"reviews"},{"content":"","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/book-reviews/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Book Reviews","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/criticism/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Criticism","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/english-literature/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"English Literature","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/good-reading/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Good Reading","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/literary-theory/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Literary Theory","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/literature/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Literature","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/reason/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Reason","type":"tags"},{"content":"I feel that one needs to be an Orwell, or a Tolkien to be in a position to review a Lewis \u0026ndash; and I intend to say much about each and their works, especially Lewis. And who am I that anyone should care about the things I, an unknown midget, say about these giants and what they wrote? For this reason, lest anyone thinks I\u0026rsquo;m delusional to put myself on the same pedestal as these authors, the first thing I want to say is that most books I read actually \u0026ldquo;review\u0026rdquo; me (if that makes any sense) rather than the other way around. And so, this exercise will be more about sharing some of the notes I take as I read, even as I offer occasional critiques if and when they\u0026rsquo;re called for.\nBooks are not created equal, that is, they don\u0026rsquo;t require the same kind of reading. Some books are difficult and have to be worked through slowly, others are entertaining, and others don\u0026rsquo;t require that much effort and don\u0026rsquo;t demand that one reads every word in them.\nRegardless of the type of book, I intend to consume them \u0026ldquo;actively\u0026rdquo;, as opposed to the passive kind of reading I\u0026rsquo;ve done throughout the years. And why do I need to be \u0026ldquo;active\u0026rdquo; in my reading? Because, as Francis Bacon says, and also knowing my own limits, I want to be a \u0026ldquo;full man\u0026rdquo;:\nReading maketh a full man, conference [i.e conversation] a ready man, and writing an exact man. And therefore, if a man write little, he had need have a great memory; if he confer [i.e., engage in conversation] little, he had need have a present wit; and if he read a little, he had need have much cunning to seem to know that he doth not. Francis Bacon 1\nTherefore, I intend to write at the very least a short summary of the things I glean from my own reading \u0026ndash; but hopefully more than this for hard books. Will I be able to sustain this discipline over the long haul? God willing. I hope I do. I\u0026rsquo;ve got to at least try, right? We\u0026rsquo;ll see how it goes.\nLatest Reviews The Pilgrim's Regress An Allegorical Apology for Christianity, Reason, and Romanticism 4 August 2026\u0026middot;6 mins Fiction Allegory What does this allegorical fiction say about human desire? Proof as Moral Obligation 9 June 2026\u0026middot;4 mins Non Fiction Apologetics What does it mean to prove something? Taking Religion Seriously 14 May 2026\u0026middot;6 mins Memoir What happens when a political scientist examines religion? The Day the Revolution Began - Part V Mission, Love \u0026 Conclusion 31 March 2026\u0026middot;11 mins Non Fiction Theology Concluding our Journey of \u0026lsquo;Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion\u0026rsquo;. The Day the Revolution Began - Part IV The Cross According to Paul 26 March 2026\u0026middot;15 mins Non Fiction Theology Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion in Paul\u0026rsquo;s letters. The Day the Revolution Began - Part III The Cross in the Gospels \u0026 Acts 19 March 2026\u0026middot;18 mins Non Fiction Theology Reconsidering the meaning of Jesus\u0026rsquo; crucifixion in the Gospels and the book of Acts. Quote found in this talk.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"13 février 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/why-review/","section":"Articles","summary":"Is there anything to gain from this exercise?","title":"Why Write Book Reviews?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"31 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/convictions/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Convictions","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"31 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/eccentricity/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Eccentricity","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"31 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/faith/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Faith","type":"tags"},{"content":" And Elijah came near to all people and said, \u0026ldquo;How long will you go limping between two opinions?\u0026rdquo;\u0026hellip; 1 Kings 18:21\nIn the criticisms that surfaced after the recent death of a prominent figure, one recurring theme was the confidence with which he held his views. Many felt that his confidence was excessive, as he spoke with a degree of certainty that left little room for opposing perspectives \u0026ndash; even on matters still open to debate. To his critics, this manner suggested a lack of intellectual humility, and at times his rhetoric was perceived as bordering on arrogance.\nThis all came about at a time when I was trying, over the course of the past few months, to decide what I believed about one particular issue. Two positions presented themselves and, regardless of efforts I made to read extensively about the topic, I found myself unable to settle on either. Both positions were backed by good and reasonable arguments and the different voices I trust regarding the matter landed on opposing sides. I resolved that, since I couldn\u0026rsquo;t pick a side, I should then find a way to live in the middle. That seemed to me to be the path of humility and the way to be honest about my limits. And since I’m no expert on the matter, I didn\u0026rsquo;t want to come across as arrogant as the aforementioned fellow over issues about which I cannot be totally certain. I preferred nuance, and rejected what seemed to me an overly simplistic and unsophisticated stance.\nDoes this imply that I believe truth to be a kind of spectrum? Do I then think that true virtue is displayed in being “balanced” in what one believes (as opposed to going to extremes while being critical of others)? Am I suggesting a complete rejection of a \u0026ldquo;black-and-white\u0026rdquo; view of the world in favor of learning to live comfortably among its many \u0026ldquo;shades of gray\u0026rdquo;? There are many ways to challenge this line of thinking, but before doing so, I would like first to revisit one of my earlier reflections 1.\nCertainty \u0026amp; Action # There were probably many war generals those days, and I’d imagine that many tacticians and strategists with more experience stood up to challenge these two young men; mere spies sent to survey a land that was soon to be invaded. Caleb and Moses\u0026rsquo; young protégé Joshua; only two individuals, stood \u0026ldquo;contra mundum\u0026rdquo; 2, in front of an entire nation, with much courage, and contrary to popular opinion, to say without any hint of doubt that the many giants spotted in the land of Canaan would certainly be defeated, and that, should the people proceed with the invasion, these giants will be \u0026ldquo;as bread\u0026rdquo; for them (Numbers 14:9).\nOf all the lessons you can pull out of this story, rejecting postures of certainty cannot be one of them. The entire assembly was ready to stone the two men for trying to incite their nation into a war they could not win. Even though Caleb and Joshua couldn\u0026rsquo;t account with 100% certainty how they would win, they nevertheless stood unflinchingly in front of an angry mob with unshakable resolve. Were they showcasing war strategy expertise or was it a classic case of the Dunning-Kruger effect ? Was it bravery on their part or was it recklessness? Were they being arrogant? Were they in over their heads and sufferings from delusions of grandeur?\nNo one is able to know a single thing absolutely ; leave alone most things. Does that imply that we can never be certain about anything? Should we then give up on certainty since we cannot possibly know anything exhaustively? Not quite.\nDouglas Wilson makes a sharp observation in his book Proof as Moral Obligation when he writes that for us, limited as we are in our knowledge and capacity, “Action (not theory) is the measurement of certainty”. In other words, be conflicted and uncertain and undecided all you want; at the end of the day, if action is required, one can only commit to one and only one course. Suppose we\u0026rsquo;re asking ourselves whether or not God exists; your verbal response may sound intelligent, balanced, informed and very nuanced \u0026ndash; and there\u0026rsquo;s nothing wrong with that \u0026ndash; but it is by evaluating your actions that we\u0026rsquo;re going to truly measure your certainty. Your rhetoric might avoid impressions of certainty, but life, lived through actions, won\u0026rsquo;t give you that choice.\nIf you leave the realm of theory and come to action, you\u0026rsquo;ll find that things get drastically simpler; you have to do this thing or this other thing and one must choose which. If God is God, then He demands your worship. You may feel you need more time, you may doubt his existence, or you may simply deem the question irrelevant \u0026ndash; but even then, you still face the fact that there are only two ways to live.\n“…choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord”\nJoshua 24:15\nThis isn\u0026rsquo;t to say that theories are useless. Far from that. Obviously, time and study should be dedicated to refine our worldviews and we must continually examine our beliefs to ensure that they\u0026rsquo;re in accord with the truth. There\u0026rsquo;s no question about that. Unfortunately, and this is the point I\u0026rsquo;m trying to get across, life won\u0026rsquo;t always give you the time to sort out your beliefs. You might be conflicted about something and life won\u0026rsquo;t wait until you earn a PhD on the subject or else wait until you feel ready to choose a way forward. As said previously 1, life demands a foundation because we just cannot remain suspended mid-air, forever crippled by our limited capacity to know anything exhaustively. We must build our lives somehow and somewhere, and that sometimes cannot wait. The choice is not whether we will stand on a conviction, but which conviction we will choose to stand on. Whether that foundation is \u0026ldquo;solid rock\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;shifting sand,\u0026rdquo; one thing is certain: nobody lives without a floor (Matthew 7:21).\nThe choice is not whether we will stand on a conviction, but which conviction we will choose to stand on. Stated differently, regardless of one\u0026rsquo;s private feelings and convictions (or lack thereof), nothing will ever excuse or exempt anyone from action. Even our Lord, as Paul writes elsewhere, will \u0026ldquo;render to each one according to his works\u0026rdquo; (Romans 2:6), showing how stated beliefs and words, important though they are, cannot reveal the ground upon which a life is built as actions do.\nExcuses, Confidence, Faith # \u0026ldquo;How then should we live?\u0026rdquo;, you\u0026rsquo;d ask. It does not seem fair that we’re forced to choose a course of action when we’re not always fully satisfied and fully convinced with the available evidence. To make matters worse, for any given topic, you\u0026rsquo;ll find a gazillion interpretations \u0026ndash; many of which are at odds. Some even say that truth is \u0026ldquo;relative\u0026rdquo;; meaning that anyone can just \u0026ldquo;live their truth\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; or worse, make up their own truth. What does one do amidst all this confusion?\nFor what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them… So they are without excuse.\nRomans 1:19-20\nThis is the Apostle Paul’s way of telling us that we’re not left alone to grope in the dark; left only with guesses and estimates and hunches about the truth. Being our creator, He’s not surprised that we have cognitive limits, but instead He has taken it all into account and made provisions for what our small minds will ‘require’ to know about Him and His world and how we’re to live in it.\nWhether well meaning or not, people sometimes twist the truth and, as a result, create paralyzing confusions \u0026ndash; especially, as Wilson intimates, through the logic games played by philosophers. However, what Paul is saying here is of massive importance: our omniscient creator\u0026rsquo;s voice will also make itself heard and it shall bring light \u0026ndash; and darkness cannot overcome it (John 1:5).\nHe has taken into account our cognitive limits and made provisions for what out minds will 'require' to know about Him and His world and how we're to live in it. He has foreknown that we’ll eventually become aware of our limitations and so He’s made it such that we can put whatever little trust we can muster upon Him who knows everything absolutely. His desire for us is to be confident; only in Him. He assures us that if we ground our entire lives on Him and in His words, that we’ll not be shaken and that we’ll never see it all come crashing down like a house of cards. In other words: “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame” (Romans 10:11). As previously stated, He’s gone to great lengths to assure us that heaven and earth will have to first pass away before “the smallest letter, or one stroke of a letter” of His words becomes unreliable (Matthew 5:18). And how wonderful is that? Conclusion # It should be evident that I’m not suggesting that we should close our ears to anything that fails to align with our beliefs. On the contrary, if we have confidence in the stability of the ground upon which we have built our lives, we need not fear allowing opposing views try to shake it. A secure foundation is not threatened by scrutiny. In this sense, confident belief is not like fragile glassware but more like a caged lion released in the wild: no one worries whether it will survive the exposure. Therefore, let\u0026rsquo;s evaluate and scrutinize the reliability of views advanced, rather than begrudging the (sometimes cheerful) confidence of those who may, in fact, have good reasons to place their trust so fully in them.\nIt\u0026rsquo;s true that some may be under the illusion that their views have the strength of a lion when in reality theirs is as weak as a house cat. Even so, what ought to be challenged is the view itself rather than the confidence with which it is held. In such cases, confidence is indeed misplaced \u0026ndash; but confidence is not the problem; the problem lies on the ground upon which it rests. Put differently, let\u0026rsquo;s not be allergic to the idea of having clear, firm and even fierce convictions, as the Lord himself commends such resolve, as seen in Caleb and Joshua.\n“Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen”\nHebrews 11:1\nArticle to be found here .\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nContra Mundum is latin for \u0026ldquo;against the world\u0026rdquo;, used most notably for St. Athanasius as he stood alone in defense of the doctrine of the deity of Christ. Read more here .\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"31 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/gotta-be-white-or-black/","section":"Articles","summary":"After you\u0026rsquo;ve pondered all possible nuances, you\u0026rsquo;ll eventually have to act!","title":"Gotta Be White or Black","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"31 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/knowledge/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Knowledge","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"31 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/wisdom/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Wisdom","type":"tags"},{"content":"I am not about to pretend to be a productivity guru. Over the years, I\u0026rsquo;ve made many resolutions of my own and the results are exactly what you\u0026rsquo;d expect: sometimes they worked, but more often than not, I failed miserably \u0026ndash; especially with those set around this time of the year. Still, I\u0026rsquo;ve learned a great deal from that and I\u0026rsquo;d like to share 5 things I\u0026rsquo;ve found useful to keep in mind anytime I\u0026rsquo;ve resolved to do something.\n1. Hold Your Plans Lightly # Think of yourself as a farmer. Trying to meticulously plan for a good outcome is like scattering good seeds in good soil. There\u0026rsquo;s only so much you can do to secure a good harvest;alas, much more remains out of your control. Floods, drought, pests, fire, etc. So much can go wrong even after you\u0026rsquo;ve done everything right. \u0026ldquo;Man plans, God laughs\u0026rdquo;, so they say. God decides ultimately. This is His world! What He decrees is what happens! It is His purposes that finally stand! 1\nWe are bound, sooner or later, to experience frustration. We plan for tomorrow, but we \u0026lsquo;do not know what tomorrow will bring\u0026rsquo; 2. We\u0026rsquo;ll at times hit a snag. Things won\u0026rsquo;t always pan out the way we designed. Unforeseen events. \u0026ldquo;Acts of God\u0026rdquo;. So much can derail us. A single event can drastically change the entire course of our lives! However, if there\u0026rsquo;s any \u0026rsquo;love of God\u0026rsquo; in you, this need not be a point of frustration, because eventually, you\u0026rsquo;ll see how \u0026ldquo;all things work together for good\u0026rdquo; (Romans 8:28). Therefore, in all things, hold your plans lightly.\nThe common suggestion to \u0026ldquo;pray as you plan\u0026rdquo; sure sounds tacky for those who don\u0026rsquo;t usually (or never) pray. To others, though we won\u0026rsquo;t admit it, it sounds like a magical incantation meant to trick God into getting on board with our plans. In any case, and the way I see it, there\u0026rsquo;s no other way to get your heart ready to truly say (and mean it): \u0026ldquo;Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done!\u0026rdquo;\n2. Failure is Sometimes a Good Thing # I\u0026rsquo;ve had my fair share of failure in this regard, just like everybody else. However, looking back now, I don\u0026rsquo;t feel bad in many cases. Perhaps the resolutions weren\u0026rsquo;t wise to begin with. Or maybe they were unrealistic, unreasonable, silly or otherwise unnecessary. The resolutions could have been, in and of themselves good, but they perhaps were not a good fit for me.\nIt\u0026rsquo;s not a given that I\u0026rsquo;m always in the right frame of heart or mind when I make resolutions, and so if I end up failing at a bad resolution, I consider that to be a good thing. Therefore (and it should be obvious why) I\u0026rsquo;m very grateful that I did not succeed at the wrong thing. So, in a sense, thank God for failure!\n3. Success is Not Always a Good Thing # This is closely related to my previous point. For those individuals who are graced with steely resolves, unyielding determination and relentlessness; these all are double-edged swords: that is, they can potentially work against you. Water can float a boat but it can also sink it. Success at the wrong goal seldom comes without a cost.\nTherefore, it doesn\u0026rsquo;t matter that we\u0026rsquo;ve made good plans and that we have enough will power to get us through, so long as the target is wrong. It doesn\u0026rsquo;t matter if you\u0026rsquo;re sailing smoothly if you\u0026rsquo;re rushing toward uncharted waters where your ship will certainly sink! What would you gain if, in the course of fighting one vice, you end up getting a worse one? What would you gain if in the course of fighting flu, you somehow end up with cancer? \u0026ldquo;What would it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul?\u0026rdquo; Would any of it be worth it?\nIn these cases, your effective planning is paving a straight and smooth \u0026lsquo;highway to hell\u0026rsquo;, and the insidious thing is that you might never realize what\u0026rsquo;s happening: In the process of success, no one ever wants to stop and question the success itself. Who would ever want to wake up when their dreams are coming true? In the same way, success, like a huge rolling stone, can be hard to control.\nBeware then when you\u0026rsquo;re succeeding.\n4. You Go Only as Far as Your Desire is Intense # The Scottish reformer John Knox is known for this prayer: \u0026ldquo;Give me Scotland, Or I Die!\u0026rdquo; 3. The passion was burning. The zeal consumed him.\nLikewise, the success of your resolutions requires this kind of passion that overflows in abundance. How bad you want something ultimately matters. More than the zeal which flickers briefly, you need the kind to carry you over the long haul; otherwise it\u0026rsquo;ll be like driving a long journey without enough fuel in your tank: it\u0026rsquo;s a lost cause.\nDesires are fed to grow. Consequently, said desires should be fed in proportion to the length of the journey as well as the hardship to be met along the way. Years of alcoholism won\u0026rsquo;t relent unless a desire with a stronger pull takes hold; namely a desire for something more satisfying and longer lasting than whatever was at the bottom of the bottle.\nHowever, just as I\u0026rsquo;ve warned in my previous point, even if you were aiming at the right goal, the desire that drives you toward it is not automatically made pure \u0026ndash; regardless of its intensity. To come back to our \u0026lsquo;fuel\u0026rsquo; analogy, the quantity of fuel you have to move forward matters less than the type and quality of said fuel because the wrong kind totally spoils your engine. What I\u0026rsquo;m trying to say is that it matters more that you\u0026rsquo;re animated by virtue instead of greed, justice instead of vengeance, courage instead of pride, hope instead of despair, love and joy instead of envy and jealousy, wisdom and understanding instead of recklessness and sloth.\nTo put it differently: Yes, the intensity of the desire propelling you forward matters a great deal; but it matters (infinitely) more that you\u0026rsquo;re moved by the Holy Spirit and not by vile demons!\n5. Nothing Ever Happens Without a Plan # This should be obvious. In fact, up until now I\u0026rsquo;ve assumed that the sensible thing to do is to plan how you\u0026rsquo;re going to work on your resolutions. Besides, what are resolutions if not reminders that few good things \u0026ndash; if any \u0026ndash; happen without deliberate plan and effort? Isn\u0026rsquo;t that nature\u0026rsquo;s way to let us know that we just don\u0026rsquo;t stumble into virtue unless we plan to?\nMoreover, if we were always successful in our resolutions, we would have no need for them to begin with. Our frequent failures indicate that there\u0026rsquo;s always some inherent difficulty. Forming healthy habits rarely (if ever) feels like a gentle stroll down the street; it rather always feels like swimming against the tide.\nShowing why nothing good ever comes easily and naturally would be out of scope of this article. This is rather unfortunate because it would have explained how not all things can be planned and worked on with sheer will over time. If your resolution is \u0026ldquo;to become the most joyful and loving human\u0026rdquo;, well, I don\u0026rsquo;t think a mere plan will help you get there. However, for what can be planned, a plan is essential \u0026ndash; even though, as I must stress again, it always takes more than a plan.\nWith that said, I\u0026rsquo;ll echo the common wisdom that \u0026ldquo;failure to plan is a plan to fail\u0026rdquo;. Let\u0026rsquo;s learn from ants who, having no overseer, make diligent plans for winter (Proverbs 6:6-8). Likewise, if there\u0026rsquo;s hope to ever get something done, we must make such plans. Certainly, much more can be said about making (and designing) good plans. I\u0026rsquo;ll only point to the biggest mistake we make by wanting to \u0026rsquo;eat an elephant in a single bite\u0026rsquo;, thus revealing a heart similar to that of a thief who wants everything at once and without delay. Instead, we should imitate the patience of builders who raise even the most imposing structure one brick at a time. We do that by making plans made of specific, detailed steps that are measurable, manageable and subject to periodic review.\nFor more on this, read: Proverbs 19:21, Job 42:2, Isaiah 46:10\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nA number of verses express this thought: Proverbs 27:1, James 4:13-15, etc.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nHere is an article for a bit of background on John Knox and his prayer.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"3 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/five-guidelines-for-your-resolutions/","section":"Articles","summary":"Few small things to keep in mind when you make resolutions.","title":"5 Guidelines For Your Resolutions","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"3 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/change/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Change","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"3 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/desire/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Desire","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"3 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/new-year/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"New Year","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"3 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/plans/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Plans","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"3 janvier 2026","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/resolutions/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Resolutions","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/christmas/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Christmas","type":"tags"},{"content":"Legend has it that kings who reigned in the precolonial kingdom of Burundi were born with seeds in their hands 1. This miraculous birth served to reassure people who needed a sign that this unique individual with a unique call to rule, had the approval of the gods. This aspect can scarcely be said to be peculiar; virtually all other kingdoms (whether great or small) throughout history in the rest of the world had their own versions of myths surrounding the birth of their future kings \u0026ndash; some of which are similar to ours. Certainly, no one looking back now actually believes any of that to have been true, but we sort of understand their urge to have, through these rituals, a divine sanction.\nI also understand the tendency to bundle the nativity story together with such legends especially as it seems to have the same characteristics: Jesus\u0026rsquo; life and calling was, to say the least, also exceptional, and since Jesus himself claimed divine origin, then his (sympathetic) biographers could have followed the ancient custom of \u0026lsquo;spicing up\u0026rsquo; the story of his birth to authenticate his claims. So, when you read of \u0026lsquo;wise\u0026rsquo; men following a moving star until \u0026lsquo;it came to rest over the place where the child was\u0026rsquo;, or when you read of a child born of a virgin and angels coming down to praise God with the shepherds; you\u0026rsquo;re really expected to take that with a pinch of salt.\nScience, Turkeys and Twin Babies # Richard Dawkins once 2 said that he wasn\u0026rsquo;t not sure how he\u0026rsquo;d react if all of a sudden a \u0026lsquo;giant 900 foot\u0026rsquo; tall Jesus were to reveal himself for him and everyone around to see. Even then, he says, he wouldn\u0026rsquo;t believe. In fact, he adds what you\u0026rsquo;d expect from someone who has no categories for \u0026lsquo;miracles\u0026rsquo;; namely that the most plausible explanation would be that he, and everyone else, were hallucinating. In other words, he\u0026rsquo;d prefer to believe that there\u0026rsquo;s some kind of mass delusion going on rather than trusting his eyes and those of others who have seen, as well as their collective capacity for observation \u0026ndash; which, oddly enough, was up until this point something that science heavily relies on.\nI came across what\u0026rsquo;s commonly known as the \u0026ldquo;Turkey Illusion\u0026rdquo; 3 which is about imagining yourself to be a very intelligent turkey and you\u0026rsquo;re lecturing your fellow turkeys on how, based on careful observations and data you\u0026rsquo;ve meticulously gathered for many months, the human who usually brings them food is a creature that has nothing but their best intentions at heart. In this case, the most intelligent and observant turkey cannot predict, explain or even conceptualize the soon coming mass slaughter on Thanksgiving day.\nIn the same vein, there\u0026rsquo;s the \u0026ldquo;parable of the unborn twins\u0026rdquo; 4 \u0026ndash; which I\u0026rsquo;m sure you\u0026rsquo;ve heard of as I\u0026rsquo;ve seen many versions of it online. It\u0026rsquo;s a story that imagines a conversation the babies are having in their mother\u0026rsquo;s womb. Based on logical conclusions drawn from available data, one of them thinks that there\u0026rsquo;s no such thing as \u0026rsquo;life after delivery\u0026rsquo; and that \u0026rsquo;this is all there is\u0026rsquo;. Besides, he continues, all they\u0026rsquo;ve ever needed somehow finds them where they are and so there really is no use of wondering about the existence of a \u0026lsquo;mother\u0026rsquo; and \u0026rsquo;life after delivery\u0026rsquo;?\nAs any other parable, the above two should only be taken as such and not be pushed too far. The stories only show that it would be unrealistic to suppose that nothing could ever escape our observation lenses. Even for well known and extensively studied subjects, there are still many unknowns, many phenomena that still fall beyond our capacity to explain. Science, with all the blessings it gives us, and how it thankfully pushes our human race forward, cannot be said to be infallible. As long as it\u0026rsquo;s still run by humans, science will still err, misdiagnose, misapply, miscalculate or misunderstand; even with the brightest minds at work.\nKings, Massacres \u0026amp; Stars # A close reading of the aforementioned Christmas stories makes it highly unlikely that they\u0026rsquo;re meant to be taken as myths. Luke opens his gospel reassuring his correspondent, the most excellent Theophilus, that what he\u0026rsquo;s about to read is a product of extensive research and that he can actually have \u0026ldquo;certainty\u0026rdquo; in the factuality of the accounts (Luke 1:1-4). How strange would it be then if, after such a preface, he immediately went on to report legends as facts? Matthew on the other hand starts his gospel with a carefully researched genealogy of Jesus and without losing a breath, he goes on to recount the story of his birth. It\u0026rsquo;s then evident that, if you pick any of the gospels, you should know you\u0026rsquo;re reading what\u0026rsquo;s intended as true history; at least by the way the books present themselves.\nMoreover, one wonders: why would Matthew report this story of wise men \u0026ndash; the people who were guided by a \u0026lsquo;star\u0026rsquo; \u0026ndash; and not just leave it altogether? If you\u0026rsquo;re a first century Jew and you\u0026rsquo;re writing with a purpose of inspiring Jews; a people known to distance themselves from anything related to star-gazing or astrology (Isaiah 47:13), seeking omens(Leviticus 19:26) let alone any form of sun, moon or star worship, why then would you report about seemingly strange people who might be into questionable practices if it\u0026rsquo;s not in fact true? Is there anything to gain from it? Jews do not need validation from foreigners \u0026ndash; never mind astrologers. Their savior doesn\u0026rsquo;t need to be \u0026lsquo;discovered\u0026rsquo; by aliens \u0026ndash; however wise! The difficulties of believing this story to be fake compound. What would I gain if, for example, in order to inspire Muslims, I was to write a story of the birth of Muhammad and include such details of how some Americans, guided by pigs, found him, identified him before anyone else and gave him gifts \u0026ndash; perhaps such an extreme and quite silly (and possibly offensive) example, but, you get the point.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s not forget the fact that, Herod the Great, the king of Israel and Judah at the time of Jesus\u0026rsquo; birth, got so paranoid and furious about the whole thing that he ordered the killing of all male children that were two years and under, in and around Bethlehem, just to ensure this child that the wise men went to see never grew up to dethrone him (or his descendants).\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re making stuff up, you should remain as vague as possible and talk of events that are practically unverifiable, or maybe if you should risk it, tell stories that are very hard to verify. But what you should absolutely avoid is implicating prominent people as antagonists and speak of grave and upsetting events like mass killings. This make it really easy for people to debunk your claims and it puts your deceptions a little bit on the nose \u0026ndash; and that\u0026rsquo;s not a good way to ensure your fabrications last, not to mention having any influence.\nMiracles, Intellect \u0026amp; Belief # The first people who heard and believed these stories were not so primitive nor so savage to the degree that they didn\u0026rsquo;t comprehend that; virgins and old women (in the case of Elizabeth) can\u0026rsquo;t give birth, and that God himself was born through a woman He created. It\u0026rsquo;s quite condescending to think they didn\u0026rsquo;t understand the implications of believing these out-of-the-ordinary facts. They knew fully the difficulties inherent, philosophical or otherwise, when you decide to believe that God himself (if there\u0026rsquo;s a God) became man \u0026ndash; and quite frankly, I think they might have appreciated this miracle more than us who think ourselves enlightened. Yet, they believed.\nIt\u0026rsquo;s not at all idiotic to believe in the truth behind these \u0026lsquo;miraculous\u0026rsquo; stories. One doesn\u0026rsquo;t have to numb one\u0026rsquo;s intellect in order to embrace them, rather it\u0026rsquo;s in fact acknowledging the limits that one had always had and not inflate one\u0026rsquo;s intellect\u0026rsquo;s capacity. This is a plea to really consider, as I myself do, that those miracles really happened and ponder the implications. If indeed these miracles and events truly happened at some point in history, then you\u0026rsquo;ll find that this is the kind of truth not to put on your shelf, but one that places great demands on you.\nFor we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.\n2 Peter 1:16\nWould you consider this Jesus story?\nMerry Christmas!\nThe seeds could be sorghum, millet, etc. This article gives a background.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nRichard Dawkins in an interview Short \u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nThe Turkey illusion \u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nParable of unborn babies has many versions, you may check this Instagram reel \u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"17 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/cleverly-devised-myths/","section":"Articles","summary":"Do we need to numb our intellect in order to believe these Christmas stories?","title":"Cleverly Devised Myths?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"17 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/miracles/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Miracles","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/myths/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Myths","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/science/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Science","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/stars/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Stars","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"10 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/confessions/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Confessions","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"10 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/peace/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Peace","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"10 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/restlessness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Restlessness","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"10 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/saint-augustine/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Saint Augustine","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"10 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/satisfaction/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Satisfaction","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"10 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/tranquility/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Tranquility","type":"tags"},{"content":"If I\u0026rsquo;ve not said this before I\u0026rsquo;ll say it here now that Augustine\u0026rsquo;s Confessions 1 would definitely make the list of books I\u0026rsquo;d choose to take if I was stranded on a desert island. He would make prayers of the sort that leave me with nothing else to add other than a hearty \u0026ldquo;Amen\u0026rdquo;:\n\u0026ldquo;Man is a great mystery, Lord. You even keep count of the hairs on his head and not one of them escapes your reckoning. Yet his hairs are more easily counted than his feelings and the emotions of his heart.\u0026rdquo; 2\nWhy are we restless? The condition is elsewhere depicted like this:\n\u0026ldquo;But the wicked are like the tossing sea;\nfor it cannot be quiet,\nand its waters toss up mire and dirt.\u0026rdquo;\nIsaiah 57:20\nI deeply appreciate the image of the “tossing sea” used in this verse as it conveys that which is always active and never at rest. No quietness. No tranquility. The sea also points to an inability to ever be satisfied, as we see the preacher of Ecclesiastes pointing to how “all streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full” (Ecclesiastes 1:7). The same image of restless water is used again when Jude talks about “ungodly people” as “wild waves of the sea” (Jude 17). No doubt, this \u0026lsquo;wildness\u0026rsquo; points to some kind of force or, if you will, a strong turbulence characteristic of a restlessness within. Jacob said something similar about his first born son Reuben whose passions were as “turbulent as the waters”(Genesis 49:4 NIV).\nConsider another admonishment from Jeremiah:\n\u0026quot;…Look at your way in the valley;\nknow what you have done—\na restless young camel running here and there,\na wild donkey used to the wilderness,\nin her heat sniffing the wind!\nWho can restrain her lust?…\u0026quot;\nJeremiah 2:23-24\nA place where longings in their raging intensity are never satisfied sure sound like ‘hell’ \u0026ndash; hence the above vivid and evocative images used by scripture. Why can’t these ever find rest? The well known quote from Saint Augustine which opens the entire book could serve as our answer:\nThe thought of You stirs [man] so deeply that he cannot be content unless he praises You, because You have made us for yourself, and our hearts find no peace until they rest in You. 3\nWithout the Lord our maker, we\u0026rsquo;ll be drowned by (and in) our own desires.\nThose who look for their happiness in him are those who belong to the “Prince of peace”. They inherit the promise of \u0026ldquo;rest\u0026rdquo;.\nAnd unlike the restless and unstable ones, these are as firm and stable as a “tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season and its leaf does not wither” (Psalm 1). They’re in no way self made and it\u0026rsquo;s not because they haven\u0026rsquo;t got any desires in them. No. They drank from a special well. Jesus said of them:\n\u0026quot;…Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I’ll give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.\u0026quot;\nJohn 4:13-14\nCome then, friend; the Lord bids us come and drink from the well that never runs dry:\n\u0026ldquo;And the Lord will guide you continually and satisfy your desire in scorched places and make your bones strong; and you shall be like a watered garden, like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail.\u0026rdquo;\nIsaiah 58:11\nConfessions, Penguin Classics, using the R.S. Pine-Coffin translation Paperback \u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nAugustine, Confessions Book IV, Chapter 14.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nAugustine, Confessions Book I, Chapter 1, first paragraph.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"10 décembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/why-are-we-restless/","section":"Articles","summary":"It\u0026rsquo;s easier to count his hairs than his moods or emotions of his heart.","title":"Why Are We Restless?","type":"articles"},{"content":"As I anticipate objections to this title, let me immediately point out two things: first, the answer to the question is “Yes, we are!”, well, kind of. But you need not feel attacked as I’m not shaping this piece specifically to target anyone in particular. However, if you still think that there’s no valid reason to ask questions with such strong derogatory and judgmental overtones, and in light of the first point that definitely makes it worse, then — and this will be my second point — let me at once ask you, most esteemed reader, to forgive me. Perhaps such words like “unwise” or “imprudent” would have been better than “stupid”. Maybe. However, allow me to make a case for it.\nIt is hard to put up with a rude person, and you’ll acknowledge this fact if you’ve ever had to deal with such at any point in your life. But at the same time, you’ll also probably agree that every now and then, and even through their usual unkind words, they’ll say something so true you’ll have no choice other than to admit they’re doing you a favor by being candid. As much as this is a hard pill to swallow at first, it will toughen you up, give you a thicker skin and make you better overall — even as you’ll be right to continue to not condone rudeness in general. I tried to follow my own advice as I picked up the book “Basic Laws of Human Stupidity” by the late Italian economic historian Carlo M. Cipolla, and I was ready to consider myself ‘stupid’ — provided of course that good, clear and logical arguments are presented.\nLaws of Stupidity # According to Cipolla, there are four kinds of people: the helpless, the intelligent, the bandit and the stupid. I was fascinated by the “bandit” type (defined as the person who causes losses to other people for his own gain) as well as the “stupid” person (defined as one who causes losses to his victims in addition to himself). Cipolla asserts that, since people do not normally act consistently, you’ll be able to find all these traits simultaneously in one person and it’ll still make sense. The only exception to this rule is the “stupid” person who shows “a strong proclivity toward perfect consistency in all fields of human endeavor”; meaning, only the ‘stupid’ person will be consistent in his behavior (i.e. stupidity).\nYou’ll rightly ask yourself why the stupid person does what he does and wonder why he is always working against himself? It doesn’t make any sense. Perhaps it’s ignorance, naïveté, lack of education, simple-mindedness or lack of experience. However, Cipolla discards the lack of education as a valid explanation for stupidity. He insists that this has nothing to do with the level of education because, according to him, scholars and people with PhDs can be just as stupid as the rest of us. Moreover, Cipolla is adamant that there are no reasons whatsoever that can explain stupidity. No one will ever understand a stupid person because there’s no rationale behind his behavior (hence the stupidity), and this person will be very dangerous due to the fact that the stupidity in question lacks of any sort of rational structure and is unpredictable in principle. How can anyone shield themselves against this?\nWe may be able to understand the “bandit” at least since all he wants is “a plus on his account” despite the amount of damage and harm he needs to inflict to get his way. Even if the “bandit” burns down a forest, and causes catastrophic damage for very little gain, at least, there’s still in him a logic to follow. But the “stupid” person is a mystery to himself and to the one who observes him.\nCipolla avoids illustrations in his book and leaves it up to the readers to apply the principles he teaches as they see fit. If you try to categorize this work, it seems to be satire at first glance, but after few paragraphs, and as Nassim Nicholas Taleb points out in the foreword of the book, you’re almost “certain it must be a serious work of scholarship in economic analysis”. Regardless of its genre, the book has all characteristics of good satire, i.e. its sharp observations leave the reader in serious thought.\nWho’s the Bandit? # Personally, I wondered at first if this “bandit” type of person really exists. Can anyone really inflict harm and cause losses to others without incurring any himself? Isn’t it a ‘stupid’ thought to ever think to yourself: “I can get away with it”? As Jordan Peterson often puts it, no one is able to simply mess with the ‘fabric of reality’ and go unscathed. Reality is too big of a ‘reality’ for anyone to toy with — pardon the tautology. There must be an attitude of respect or if you will, “fear”, for things that are bigger than us. If you do not “fear God”, then, according to Scripture, you’re a fool. (Looking at the word “fool” from the Holy Bible, suddenly the word ‘stupid’ doesn’t look that bad in comparison now, does it?)\nCan anyone open their car’s bonnet and ever say, “This pipe doesn’t seem to be of any use, so I’ll just cut it out”? Will it end well for that person who thinks himself smarter than the car makers? Can any “plus” on his account, however momentary, be really considered a plus in light of impending disaster?\nWhat will happen if, going beyond what Cipolla says, we add ‘time’ to the equation? What I mean is that I may be desperate for a ‘plus on my account’ and I may count my ‘banditry’ to have been beneficial to myself (and to everyone else’s calculations) only to have the passing of time reveal to me, and to my dismay, that I miscalculated and that my account had been negative all along. How much time will it take the student who always cheats on his exams to turn the ill-gotten good grades into complete loss and regret? Can someone really live long enough without the consequences of their actions ever catching up with them?\nPerhaps our view of time is also truncated and we, in practice, discard ‘eternity’. Isn’t that why we have the impression that some people seem to ‘get away with it’? Unfortunately, eternity doesn’t just cease to exist just because we ignore it. Jesus once asked “What would it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul”? Even with countless similar warnings, we still want “all the kingdoms of the world and their glory” right now regardless of their impact on our future. Why does it seem that these warnings are ineffective? Imagine placing a huge danger sign somewhere and then observing that no one is actually disturbed by it as they all proceed unbothered straight to their destruction? That would be witnessing absurdity in live action!\nTo some degree, I agree with Cipolla on this point: you’ll never understand ‘stupidity’. No rhythm or reason backs the thoughts of the fool. They’re ever destroying themselves. They’re ever in a repetitive cycle of ‘betraying themselves for nothing’. “As a dog returns to his vomit, so a fool repeats his folly.” (Proverbs 26:11). And lest we forget, fools are not “out there”, we are them; constantly thinking we can outsmart the God who created us.\nAs we think about what our lives are about and what it is that drives us and whether or not our cause is worth living for (or if it’s stupid), let’s consider the voice of one of the kings of Israel, a man of “unsurpassed wisdom” (Ecclesiastes 1:16) . There were no riches this king had not enjoyed, no beauty he hadn’t seen, no work he hadn’t done, no knowledge he hadn’t acquired; yet in all this, he constantly complained about the vanity of it all. According to him, his life was as stupid as “chasing after the wind” (Ecclesiastes 1:12-17). Won’t it be for our good to heed of his advice, and not secretly count ourselves smarter than him?\nThe (only) Path to Wisdom # Who then is ‘the intelligent’? Who then is the one who gains ultimately? Who then is ‘the wise’ in this life? The Apostle Paul joins the old wise king of Ecclesiastes in recounting the utter stupidity of his previous life choices. Whatever he used to count as gain has now shown itself to be complete loss now that he’s found “the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord”. This is the only remedy for our stupidity — the true knowledge of God. But how can this be?\nIf you’re determined to live wisely, numerous prolific and intelligent philosophers left countless books to help the rest of us who are cognitively challenged. For Paul though, it’s not a particular (tedious) philosophy that we need to follow; it’s not an abstract or well organized thought that we need, but it’s a person we need to know — the son of God. That doesn’t sound so smart now, does it? Without going into much detail on how he lays it all out, I’ll only point out that Paul upholds that “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile” (1 Corinthians 3:20). No one is inherently smart, and according to our creator, stupidity is especially pervasive in those we consider smart.\nLet me put it this way: if all we’re accustomed to is some kind of wisdom which turns out to be stupidity and foolishness, doesn’t it follow that we won’t even be able to smell true wisdom even if it was right in front of us? Paul simply instructs us not to trust our broken senses (that are bent to make his ‘wise’ message look stupid). Our creator’s true wisdom and power is at work in his Son and in the ‘message of the cross’ to expose and shame and save us from the truly and absolute rubbish ways that we mistake for wisdom. I’ll let him have the last word:\nWhere is the one who is wise?… Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?… It pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demands signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 1 Corinthians 1:20-25\n","date":"19 octobre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/are-we-stupid/","section":"Articles","summary":"In the end, are we intelligent? Are we wise or bandits? Or are we just stupid?","title":"Are We Stupid?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"19 octobre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/bandit/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Bandit","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 octobre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/carlo-m.-cipolla/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Carlo M. Cipolla","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 octobre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/ecclesiastes/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Ecclesiastes","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 octobre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/foolishness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Foolishness","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 octobre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/intelligence/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Intelligence","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 octobre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/satire/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Satire","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 octobre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/stupidity/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Stupidity","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/beauty/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Beauty","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/communism/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Communism","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/heaven/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Heaven","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/imagine/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Imagine","type":"tags"},{"content":"People have a tendency to only base their judgement on appearances. I’m also “people” and I know this too well. Just the other day, a stack of books I ordered arrived and, contrary to my initial reading plan, I watched my hand instinctively pick the book with the most captivating cover. Proverbs warning us against this sort of thing are many (like the one that literally tells me not to judge a book by its cover) but I just couldn’t help it. These proverbs are all cautioning us to look beyond the surface, but, alas, the allure to do otherwise is stronger.\nTwo Kinds of Beautification # Appearances matter a great deal to us, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. To make things aesthetically pleasing is to be encouraged, by all means. However, you may ask, if I must ‘beautify’ something, doesn’t it mean it was ugly to begin with? And if so, wouldn’t that be an exercise in futility? Well, it depends. There’s a world of difference between whitewashing a tomb and adding icing on a cake: the first conceals the rot with a pretty facade while the other crowns what was already beautiful. In other words, what dignifies the beautification is the content or quality of what’s being beautified — the corpse or the cake.\nI find thinking this way to be a very helpful tool to evaluate works of art like songs as they mainly transact in beauty by embellishing objects/themes of their message. Songs either shine a spotlight on wonderful and beautiful themes/ideas or they just become a thin veneer on top of overt depravity. This method can be applied to any song whether by John Lennon, or Taylor Swift. Since the song “Imagine ” has garnered countless accolades, and because of its melodic merits, as well as how passionately people recently told me about its lyrical depth, I decided I should find out what kind of ‘beautification’ John Lennon was engaged in.\nIt’ll be helpful, as we proceed, to keep the words of the first verse in mind as I speak about the song in general.\nImagine there’s no heaven,\nIt’s easy if you try.\nNo hell below us,\nAbove us only sky.\nImagine all the people\nLivin’ for today\nAh, ah, ah-ah\nCharming Ideology # For starters, and without wasting a minute, I have to point out that this song sure sounds like it promotes communism, because, I have to ask, which other system would have us shun personal belongings in favor of collective ownership as a way to fight hunger and greed? In fact, John Lennon himself, in his own words , agreed that this song is “virtually ‘The Communist Manifesto’” in disguise. To be fair though, he says that he’s never seen true communism anywhere in the world and he certainly was against its Russian flavor (which failed miserably). But, he hoped there was a possibility for a nicer kind of ‘British socialism’. Given its historical record as one of the deadliest of ideologies (upward 80 million people killed), most people might recoil being associated with it, but ironically have no issue singing what communists might as well make their anthem.\nI’d perhaps, to his credit, commend his motive of promoting world unity and peace through the song. A world where there’s no reason to kill each other is to be desired. Who wouldn’t want that? But how do we get there? Lennon leaves it to our imagination. This is where I would have preferred he at least gives us a clue. It felt like what you’d see if someone were to walk towards two men fighting vigorously with only one piece of advice to them: they should “try to agree”. The motive is, again, to be commended, but the gesture shows no concern about what the fight was about; whether the issue was worth fighting for, and most importantly, it doesn’t show the path to reconciliation and harmony. John Blaney was right :\nLennon\u0026rsquo;s lyrics describe hypothetical possibilities that offer no practical solutions; lyrics that are at times nebulous and contradictory, asking the listener to abandon political systems while encouraging one similar to communism.\nSelling One’s Birthright for Stew # The world painted by Lennon doesn’t address the deepest challenges this world faces. Obviously, I shouldn’t really expect this 5-verse song to address the complexities of the world, but in this case I have reasons to bring this up; if you’ll hear me out for a moment. Take the theme of justice as an example — and this is just one example among many. As I reflected previously , our human institutions are not capable of administering justice properly. How do you punish a person who killed your loved one? No matter what punishment our justice systems might come up with, your loved one is gone and never brought back and the following (years of) sorrow will not vanish just because the murderer got life in prison (or even execution). Nothing is put right! The consequences of evil remained! Your suffering wasn’t and won’t be addressed! So, if evil is thought about seriously, you’ll realize how far reaching its consequences go and how difficult (if not impossible) it is to uproot. How many nations have been fighting for generations and generations with no end in sight because of evils committed against each other decades (if not centuries) ago?\nLennon calls us to abandon notions of heaven, hell, the afterlife, and eternity (none of which are human inventions btw) yet they’re precisely the themes that are oftentimes brought up as the only way to take present evil in its power and perversity seriously. ‘Living for today’ as the song says, and believing only in ‘today’ because heaven and hell won’t come doesn’t offer any solution to evil. And why would we exchange ‘religious’ solutions that do not turn away from issues of this magnitude but address them head on for vague and shallow ideas? Why ‘heal our wounds lightly’? Isn’t he asking us to ‘sell our birthright for stew’?\nThe better way to disagree with this ‘religious’ way of thinking as Lennon does, is at least to offer a solid and truly viable alternative. But alas, it seems to me that his recommendation is that we should just ignore these questions altogether and that we should, like an ostrich that buries its head in the sand, pretend we haven’t seen the vicious and vile and terrifying evil dragon clearly and unmistakably standing in front of us.\nImplicit Dishonesty? # Lastly, I’m not sure if he intended it or not, but Lennon’s advice to “live for today” exalts worldviews that affirm that this life is all there is. If there’s no afterlife, it then follows that evil will not be sorted (regardless of our tiny efforts) and that’s the harsh reality we have to accept. Moreover, the heaven that offered us hope that our current labor and current good works are not in vain is just an illusion; or our way to cope. It doesn’t matter whether you were a saint or a demon, nothing will make a difference, we all die tomorrow. The sooner you embrace this despair the better and the faster you’ll start doing whatever makes you happy today — whether good or bad and whether it comes with consequences or not.\nAnything short of this harsh and bracing honesty is wishful thinking. Deluding oneself into believing in an afterlife place of bliss like heaven is only for naive, simple minded folks who cannot accept reality in its harshness. Fair enough. However, said worldviews should maintain their pessimism, be truly consistent, and sell themselves as such; but by all means they shouldn’t not try to, as I keep insisting, disguise themselves as “dreams” to aspire to — especially when they implicitly mock truly optimistic views as lacking in “imagination”. Why be dishonest when you pride yourself in being the most honest person around? John Lennon again, in another instance, stated plainly:\nAnti-religious, anti-nationalistic, anti-conventional, anti-capitalistic, but because it is sugarcoated it is accepted \u0026hellip; Now I understand what you have to do. Put your political message across with a little honey.\nAh, the little honey. As I see it now, the melodic beauty of the song is not the kind that adds icing on a cake, but the kind that, unfortunately covers a pit of despair — like the whitewashing of a tomb. Something about it glittered from afar, but it wasn’t gold. “The bee has honey in its mouth and a sting in its tail” as the (honey-related) saying goes.\nIn the words of yet another popular song from the 80s , sometimes we just want someone to “tell me lies, tell me the little sweet lies”. Sometimes, we are aware of imperfections in the song and choose to sing along anyway and enjoy the moment. Maybe as you read this, you maintain that I thought too seriously and too much about a song that clearly didn’t call for such rigorous analysis. You may be right, but I’ll ask this: can anyone really go on and pretend to celebrate the (former) luster of the devil after he was unmasked and his disguise as an angel of light was removed? Can anyone really go on and on about the gentleness of a sheep after discovering that there was a ravenous wolf underneath all along?\n","date":"20 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/imagine-there-s-no-heaven/","section":"Articles","summary":"As one of the most popular song ever recorded, what does it teach us about peace, unity, beauty and God?","title":"Imagine There's No Heaven","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"20 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/john-lennon/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"John Lennon","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/unity/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Unity","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/alexander-the-great/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Alexander the Great","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/anxiety/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Anxiety","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/daniel/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Daniel","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/foreknowledge/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Foreknowledge","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/history/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"History","type":"tags"},{"content":"W e live in a world that surrounds us with a host of reasons to be anxious. Global headlines warn of impending doom: wars, recessions, disasters, etc. Beyond collective anxieties, your own personal challenges (family, finances, health…) add another layer of stress.\nI\u0026rsquo;m interested in how we deal with the resulting anxiety regardless of the issue we face. How do we cope? The practical answer is to create contingency plans where possible and not dwell on what\u0026rsquo;s beyond our control. This approach works when viewing problems from a distance, but it falls short when issues hit close to home. Some challenges come with such overwhelming force and suffocate you under their pressure — at least that’s how it feels. Anxiety is in this case unavoidable, and there\u0026rsquo;s certainly no mental space left to create \u0026ldquo;contingency\u0026rdquo; plans.\nPeople have various ways to manage the tension — some effective, others less so. There\u0026rsquo;s really no magical solution or universal remedy, and I won’t pretend to offer a secret formula to deal with this. I’ll only point to how reading an old story; initially as a way to escape, turned out to provide the anti-anxiety remedy that I desperately needed. The story isn’t fictitious. It’s a true story. The events really happened and it’s my hope that we see why this matters to us today.\nWhen Men Are Made Great # The story takes place circa 6th century BC when Daniel, a servant of the Neo-Babylonian empire and later the Persian empire, received a series of divine revelations about the future which are now recorded in the biblical book bearing his name. One prophecy in particular (Daniel 8) caught my attention as it foretold the coming rule and subsequent fall of Alexander the Great — arguably the most accomplished military commander to ever have existed. Alexander inherited the Macedonian kingdom (present-day Greece) and expanded it all the way to northwestern India. Some scholars question the book’s authenticity, arguing that no one could have predicted Alexander\u0026rsquo;s rise 300 years in advance. For them, since there’s no such thing as ‘prophecy’ or any sort of foreknowledge, the book must have been written after the fact. They believed the book to be a forgery created to inspire the Maccabean resistance (168-164 BC). Lest anyone worry, I’ll only mention that the scholarship supporting its authenticity is solid. Moreover, Jesus our (omniscient) Lord himself believed in its authority and authenticity (Matthew 24:15). Let me therefore not bother you any further with scholars and their quibbles.\nThe book of Daniel opens with the account of how Jerusalem was besieged and how its inhabitants were taken into Babylonian captivity. In his book \u0026ldquo;Dominion” , Tom Holland (not the actor) describes how the Jews found themselves exiled in a city \u0026ldquo;vast beyond their wildest imaginings\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;amid temples so steepling that they seemed to brush the sky\u0026rdquo; — the greatest of which was called \u0026ldquo;Esagila\u0026rdquo; and was deemed the oldest building in the world: \u0026ldquo;The very axis of the cosmos\u0026rdquo;. Invasion, destruction and exile; this was no doubt a very low point in their history. Tom Holland continues:\nIt would have been easy for the exiles from Jerusalem, numbed by defeat and a sense of their own puniness before the immensity of Babylon, to have accepted this bleak understanding of man’s purpose. Rather than fall to the worship of Marduk, they clung instead to the conviction that it was their own god who had brought humanity into being.\nI might have lost some of you when I started mentioning dates and empires long gone, as history is perhaps not everyone’s favorite subject. However, I find it so helpful to step back and realize that we’re not living in the darkest times by any stretch of the imagination. Thinking about these desolate exiles steeped in national despair, even at this lowest of junctures, God spoke! He called them to cling to His voice and not be led astray into trusting the foreign idols that had displayed their greatness so vividly and unmistakably. In His wisdom, God chose to give them a vision of even greater empires to come; speaking as He who transcends time and human strength. This truly leaves me astounded.\nGod doesn’t ignore their current troubles, but rather, He reminds them that He stands above the evil that has befallen them, and that His intimate knowledge extends far beyond events that lie generations beyond their own. How deep does His omniscience run? For God’s purposes are unwavering and His plans prevail. If someone becomes “great”, it’s only by God’s design and through His preordained plan. Nothing in man’s power is able to frustrate God’s decrees. He does not merely sit and watch events unfold to decide how to respond; rather, He holds the reins of all creation. He charts every route and the end of every possible trajectory is known to Him. Nothing ever takes Him by surprise.\nPeace Amid Stormy Seas # We do need regular reminders of this glorious truth to know that people aren’t just throwing out empty platitudes when they say: “God is in control”. He really is. Perhaps we forget. Or perhaps the darkness around has filled us with doubt. The psalmist says this:\nGod is our refuge and strength, A very present help in trouble. Therefore, we will not fear though the earth gives way, Though the mountains be moved into the heart of the sea, Though its waters roar and foam, Though the mountains tremble at its swelling. Psalm 46:1-3\nI must first acknowledge that if the earth were literally to be moved into the heart of the sea — a scenario climate change alarmists and activists believe we are on the precipice of — I would likely be the first to succumb to panic, throwing the above nice poem out the window. This would not be because my intellect failed to understand the implications of God\u0026rsquo;s omniscience and omnipotence. It’s rather despite it. The purpose of God\u0026rsquo;s truth (and I keep forgetting this) is not merely to make an intellectual impression; it must penetrate the innermost depths of my soul and seize me to the core. This is why I must pray!\nNo one really knows for sure what will happen. Perhaps doomsday is fast approaching. Perhaps also nothing major is going to happen in the near future. No one really knows. No one can predict all the ripple effects of actions being taken right now (no matter how well thought out). No one can ensure their future. That’s not to mean, obviously, that we should cross our arms and wait for the inevitable. We must labor hard to see a good outcome because we do have some agency! However, even then, the good outcome we hope for is not guaranteed.\nTherefore, I must entrust the future to the One who holds it — and with it His own. My primary care should be that I’m His own, for only separation from Him is to be my greatest fear. As long as I’m His own, whether through prosperity or exile, good fortune or adversity, armageddon or universal peace; “All things work together for those who love Him and are called according to His purpose” (Rom. 8:28). I must believe. I must not forget that He knows it all and has it all under His control. I must rest in the truth beautifully expressed here by Casting Crowns :\nWhen I’m lost in the mystery, To You my future is a memory, ‘Cause You’re already there.\n","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/on-facing-an-unknowable-future/","section":"Articles","summary":"The hoped-for future is never guaranteed. This old story helps us cope.","title":"On Facing an Unknowable Future","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/pressure/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Pressure","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/prophets/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Prophets","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/psalm-46/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Psalm 46","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sovereignty/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sovereignty","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"5 septembre 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/tom-holland/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Tom Holland","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/ambition/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Ambition","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/authenticity/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Authenticity","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/comparison/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Comparison","type":"tags"},{"content":"I recently put the song “Comparison Kills”1 by Jonathan McReynolds in repeat mode not simply because I like its style in general, but mostly because it made me think a bit — and so I decided to write those thoughts down. Apart from its interesting style and cadence, the song really has so much going for it, but in this post, I shall only focus on its core message.\nConsider the following selected snippet:\n[Comparison] makes you consider shoes you don\u0026rsquo;t like\nBut when that shoe doesn\u0026rsquo;t fit\nWear what you will despite how they feel\nComparison kills…\nThe grass was fine\nTil it looked greener on the other side\nNow you\u0026rsquo;re believing that you fell behind.\nWhy try to match what should be one of a kind?\nYou’re one of a kind.\nWithout listening to the entire song, with only the above verse, I believe anyone should be able to guess its overall message. I’d summarize it as an encouragement to not covet anything that is your neighbor’s: their looks, belongings, etc. McReynolds uses a number of helpful images to show how a person devoid of self contentment is at the mercy of the ravenous joy killer that is comparison.\nMonsters that kill # It’s not for nothing that this kind of comparison pushing people to be envious (or jealous) of others is commonly (and rightly) referred to as the “green-eyed monster”; one that will not hesitate to tear you apart. Interestingly enough, the symbolism behind the color green (mostly because of how green food was sometimes associated with spoilage and toxicity) associates it with similar vices: jealousy, envy, covetousness and greed. I’ve also noticed that anyone who has ever said anything wise (and memorable) about any of these vices has been careful to choose images that should evoke dread and overwhelming fear. We’ll then do well to heed these warnings with the utmost seriousness. Why be so casual about entertaining a ‘monster’ that ‘kills’ or why should we play around ‘snares’ that lead to ‘ruin and destruction’? Why pierce ourselves with ‘many pangs’? (1 Timothy 6:9-10)\nBack to the song, I believe that McReynolds uses the word ‘comparison’ as a substitute for any of these vices (jealousy, envy, covetousness and greed). He could also have meant to use the word ‘comparison’ as a means through which these green-themed sins come. However, comparison itself is not always negative — or perhaps I should say it doesn’t always have a bad outcome. For example, I could admire someone’s integrity and be inspired to change. What really happens if I’m successful here is: I compared myself away from vice into virtue! And that’s commendable.\nTherefore, comparison can sometimes be a good thing. We’re encouraged to have heroes and role models and mentors. Aren’t they people we look up to? And what’s “looking up to someone” if not a result of comparing yourself against their lives, find yours lacking and in need of improvement? The Bible even goes beyond mere suggestion to command us to imitate people who had great faith, to consider the “outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith” (Hebrews 13:7). What then do we become if we never ‘compare’ our lives against theirs?\nWrong Shoes and Greener Grass # Granted that comparing yourself in order to get better is commendable, it then follows that it involves a journey to get to that goal; a journey that usually starts with, if you will, “baby steps”. To borrow an image from McReynolds’ song, you’ll have, so to speak, “big shoes to fill”. It doesn’t mean that you should then just throw the (proverbial) shoes away because they don’t fit. Even though they feel awkward at the moment, you’re meant, in this case, to stick with and grow into them. Your feelings about the shoes and how they fit take the back seat because the noble desire to fill them is what is key. You’re not meant to remain a baby (in your steps) because that’s what seems familiar, rather you’re meant to grow and walk properly on your own.\nMore nuance is then called for as we think about this matter and we’re to be careful and prayerful. The comparison that McReynolds describes can happen both in a positive and negative sense and I’d pose this question to explain what I mean: Is it always wrong to long for “greener grass”? I don’t think so! Sometimes desiring “greener grass” is a sign of greed at work but sometimes not desiring “greener grass” shows laziness (usually hiding under the false pretense of contentment with the status quo). There are cases when not realizing “you fell behind” is deplorable and other cases when only by knowing your internal motives will it be clear if it’s the case or not.\nI believe that never longing for “greener grass” is a sign of lack of drive and ambition. To be fair, and as we know very well, ambition can either be good or bad, it all depends on the context — and probably this is why we shouldn’t rush to judge people’s lives and choices based on whether or not they’re ambitious. However, even though this is context dependent, not being animated by any sort of ambition for one reason or another is never a good sign. We shouldn’t therefore think that the song discourages any sort of ambition for fear that it’s always the product of envy or jealousy. Paul the Apostle himself, the one who asks us to imitate him, also had ambitions (Romans 15:20).\nYou’re one of a kind # My other issue, you see, is the idea of never comparing yourself because we’re supposedly meant to be ‘one of a kind’. Underneath this reasoning, I think, lies a concern for being ‘original’ or ‘authentic’ (something I also don’t want to discard) which, in my opinion, becomes an obsession if it (mis)leads you to the hard stance of not comparing yourself with others. Why is it that the Bible, while acknowledging elsewhere each individual’s uniqueness, isn’t so much concerned about losing our ‘originality’ when it commands us to imitate other people’s faith?\nC.S.Lewis said something very helpful in this regard:\n“Even in social life, you will never make a good impression on other people until you stop thinking about what sort of impression you are making. Even in literature and art, no man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth (without caring twopence how often it has been told before) you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.” Mere Christianity\nMuch can be said about originality and authenticity, however, the encouragement today is only to not let the concern of originality be the tyrant. Go ahead and compare your life against those who displayed great virtue, and work towards making said virtue truly your own; that is, let it go down deep into the very fabric of yourself until it becomes ‘second nature’. Chances are, since you’re wired uniquely and differently, the virtue in question will show itself in a way that will seem original. Besides, who’s going to complain (rather than be glad) that you showed the same kind of patience or grace (or any other virtue) that another person has displayed before?\nI’ll conclude by noting that no one can ever say everything about anything and bring all subtle nuances to bear every time — especially in a confined medium like that of a song. That is to say, my aim was not to disapprove McReynolds’s song, but rather to agree with the message to beware (and pray against) the wrong sort of comparison in its insidious nature while also highlighting cases where comparison is to be encouraged.\n\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/comparison-does-not-kill/","section":"Articles","summary":"Is comparing yourself to others as bad as we claim? Perhaps not. But let’s think about it…","title":"Comparison Does (Not) Kill","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/envy/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Envy","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/greed/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Greed","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/jealousy/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Jealousy","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/jonathan-mcreynolds/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Jonathan McReynolds","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 août 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/originality/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Originality","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 mars 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/glory/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Glory","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 mars 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/hiddenness-of-god/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Hiddenness of God","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 mars 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/perception/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Perception","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 mars 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/series/till-we-have-faces/","section":"Series","summary":"","title":"Till We Have Faces","type":"series"},{"content":"","date":"9 mars 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/till-we-have-faces/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Till We Have Faces","type":"tags"},{"content":" Allow me to bring below a complaint for our consideration:\nI say the gods deal very unrightly with us. For they will neither (which would be best of all) go away and leave us to live our own short days to ourselves, nor will they show themselves openly and tell us what they would have us do. For that too would be endurable. But to hint and hover, to draw near us in dreams and oracles, or in a waking vision that vanishes as soon as seen, to be dead silent when we question them and then glide back and whisper (words we cannot understand) in our ears when we most wish to be free of them, and to show to one what they hide from another; what is all this but cat-and-mouse play, blindman’s buff, and mere jugglery? Why must holy places be dark places?\nWhat a question!\nThis is part of Orual’s eloquent closing remarks as she presented her case against the gods — I’ve recounted her story here . If you were standing in defense of the ‘gods’, what would your answer be?\nI’ve encountered this complaint in various other forms but, in my opinion, none comes close in terms of poignancy and emotion (if you follow her story in the novel). People wonder why God is so “hidden”. Why — if He’s there — does he prefer being subtle? Why is He invisible? Why does He not walk around in the open for everyone to see? Someone (and I can’t remember who and where) wondered why is it expected for human parents to be unambiguously present especially when they’re most needed by their children but it is somehow considered normal and accepted for God to be hidden and leave us in the shadow when we, His children, alone in this vast universe, need Him the most?\nSome even push this frustration further and affirm that this is an (irrefutable) argument for the non-existence of God. I wouldn’t go that far though. If you were days into a long journey of crossing a desert where there’s nothing on your left or right other than sand and scorching heat, and all of a sudden you come across an empty but very beautiful castle with all sorts of provisions built right in the middle of the desert; wouldn’t you logically conclude there must have been people, or at least a person who built it? Just because you couldn’t see anyone inside the castle doesn’t mean its builder doesn’t (or never) existed.\nPerhaps some might think this isn’t such a good illustration, but it is at least a bit helpful to understand why someone looking at this universe and the way it is (as they say) “fine tuned” and how it feels designed and purposeful and conclude that they can’t in good conscience deny His existence.\nIf this then isn’t an argument for denying God’s existence, I wondered if christian scriptures say anything about this subject? Is this question even addressed at all? If it is, are the answers satisfying? And if not, why not?\nLet’s consider the Exodus story and more particularly the time the Lord “descended” and had Moses lead the Israelites “out of the camp to meet with God”, the one who saved them from Egyptian slavery (Exodus 19:2-25), and think of how, as they stood at the foot of that mountain, they were terrified and could not even bear hearing God’s voice — they urged Moses to relay God’s words to them instead (Exodus 20:18-19). Did that experience change them to their core? Absolutely not! It was just a matter of days and they were making idols to replace the true and awesome God whose terrifying arrival they felt.\nWould you then, you who desire physical manifestations of God, be now fully convinced of His existence and always follow Him obediently were you to see Him? Would you be better than these Israelites in the Exodus story? It’s unlikely. In fact, according to what the Bible teaches, the odds are that you would not be any better.\nIn the parable of poor Lazarus and the rich man, Jesus confirms this very truth when He tells the rich man that no miraculous sign will convince people, not “even if someone rises from the dead” (Luke 16:31). He urges the rich man and his family to stick with the (seemingly unremarkable) reading of the law and the Prophets.\nI could recall two other instances where Jesus was explicitly asked for this very same thing: a sign from heaven; that is, an absolutely irrefutable reason to believe. In the first occasion, religious scholars are the ones who asked. Let’s, for a moment, ponder Jesus’ (apparent) harsh answer:\n… a wicked, and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. Matthew 16:4\nJesus even leaves them immediately without clarifying what this sign of Jonah might be. There is, according to Jesus, something ‘wicked’ and ‘adulterous’ about wanting these signs. But what could that be?\nPerhaps, given Jesus’ reaction, we can deduce that there can be an evil, proud posture of the heart behind asking such questions. When we “demand” signs perhaps we imply we know better than God or that we understand ourselves better to know what would be more effective for us than He who created us. But that’s only my guess. Or is it?\nEven if we get frustrated by His pedagogic methods, there should always be a heart of humility when we ask ‘why questions’ to God as there could be thousands of responses that we might not even be ready to grasp. Perhaps there are good reasons why God decides to partially reveal Himself and veil the full splendor of His glory from our eyes. This is not because He doesn’t exist, and also not because He wants us to stumble in the dark as He plays ‘hide-and-seek’ with us, but rather because He deems it wise (even though we might not see it) to deal with us in such a manner.\nThis then brings us to the second scenario which took place during Jesus’ “farewell discourse” recorded in the Gospel of John. Philip, one of His disciples, requests that Jesus shows them “the Father”. “That”, Philip adds, “will be enough for us”. Jesus responds:\nDon’t you know me, Philip, even after I’ve been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, “Show us the Father”? John 14:9\nFor Philip and for the rest of us after him, we want miraculous manifestations; we need the extraordinary — or we think that’s what we need. However for Jesus, at this time, this is it; and ‘this’ is more than enough.\nGavin Ortlund in this video retells Søren Kierkegaard’s parable of a king who fell in love with a poor maiden. (You can also read the story here ). As the king thought what the most compelling way to woo her would be, he concludes that his power isn’t the solution as it could overwhelm the poor maiden. He also thought that showering her with gifts would not be effective because there was no way of knowing if she’d love him for himself or for the gifts.\nSince the king’s noble aim was “intimacy of heart and oneness of spirit”, the only way to unlock her heart was to take off his crown and royal attire. He then decided to put on the same rags the poor maiden was dressed in and become a servant as she was. This — and I think you’ll agree — was the only way. Here, once again, is the beauty of the christian story; namely the mystery of incarnation in the person of Jesus.\nNeedless to say that this also implies (in line with the christian scriptures) that God will not veil His full glory forever, but only for a time — this time. There’ll certainly come a time when He’ll fully reveal himself. However, in the meantime, we can perceive, even if only through this short parable, the (superior) wisdom in God’s hiddenness and how it is better for us at this time.\nPerhaps the best way to reveal Himself is not through overwhelming power or coercion. Perhaps, His love is better revealed when He makes His “grace irresistible” and perhaps His loveliness is better shown when He wishes our glad and joyful surrender — rather than through force. Perhaps, just as it would be the case for the king and the poor maiden, the true strength of His character (joy, patience, humility, integrity, etc.) will be better known through our normal and unremarkable every day life than through the extraordinary displays of power and omnipotence.\nI’ll grant the fact that there are so many angles through which this question can be approached and I cannot pretend to have gotten a hold of every possible reason why God designed it this way; but in the little I know and the little I was able to share, I hope you’ll see, even if through this just one aspect, that His ways, and even though seemingly upside down, are higher.\nThen Jesus told [Thomas], “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” John 20: 29\n","date":"9 mars 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/why-wont-god-just-show-himself/","section":"Articles","summary":"Why does God not walk around in the open for everyone to see? What is all this but cat-and-mouse play and mere jugglery? Why is He invisible?","title":"Why Wont God Just Show Himself?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/blindness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Blindness","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/delusion/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Delusion","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/fiction/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Fiction","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/imperfections/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Imperfections","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/self-awareness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Self-Awareness","type":"tags"},{"content":"It sure required some level of self awareness for Glen Ballard and Siedah Garret to pen the song made popular by Michael Jackson “Man in the Mirror”. To look at all the wrongs in the world, think of what can be done to fix it and come to the conclusion that one must start with oneself is not only a sign of humility, but also of wisdom and maturity.\nIt’s not always a given that people are aware of their shortcomings. Even if we become humble enough to know that we’re far from being perfect, there are always flaws that are invisible to us. Contrary to what would be assumed, their invisibility isn’t a comment on their magnitude, and what I mean by that is; you’d think that you’ll be able to identify big, glaring and obvious weaknesses and maybe only the small ones would escape detection; but that’s not always the case because it is possible to be completely oblivious to what is crystal clear and plain to others.\nMy observation isn’t exactly novel; many have already pointed this out. For instance, there’s this common (and insightful) joke that suggests that if you think your ten-years-ago self was stupid, then most probably your current self is equally stupid — as it will eventually become apparent to you ten years from now. Think also of old age regret and be amazed by the fact that what someone can be confident and proud of in the present might become a subject of shame when they age.\nThis very fact was dramatized a while back in the episode titled “Spoiler Alert” from the TV Series “How I Met Your Mother” (an episode which, interestingly enough, has its own Wikipedia page ). Ted, a young bachelor, thinks he’s going out with a ‘perfect’ girl (Cathy), but is not happy when his friends point out what they thought to be an obvious and unconcealed annoyance about Cathy: she just can’t stop talking. Ted somehow couldn’t see it until his friends told him and now he can’t stand Cathy anymore.\nIsn’t it strange that we’re not completely transparent to ourselves? Just the other day with my friends, we were wondering why people go to therapists, when said therapists only dig to find answers inside the patient — this might not be entirely how therapy works in reality, but that’s how we painted it as we joked about it. We realized — and, I think, rightly — that it requires a kind of skill that we don’t always have to really see ourselves clearly.\nIt then became evident to me that what we see when we look in the mirror isn’t a clear and crisp picture of who we really are; we might see an illusion, a distortion, an aspiration or an ideal — none of which is the unpolished and unembellished reality we are not courageous enough to see, or simply blind to. We might even be able to see a truer version of ourselves, but most times with blurry edges.\nIn my previous article , I wrote about the story of Orual (and her ugliness) from what is my current favorite novel “Till we have Faces” by C.S.Lewis. It’s worth mentioning that throughout the entire novel, she is the narrator and we’re reading a memoir of her life, written when she was old. Eighty percent of it (forming Part I of the book) is a complaint that she had always wanted to articulate since she was young.\nAs she picks up the pen again to write Part II of her memoir, she said something of the process of writing itself and how it changed her:\nWhat began the change was the very writing itself. Let no one lightly set about such a work. Memory, once waked, will play the tyrant… The past which I wrote down was not the past that I thought I had (all these years) been remembering. I did not… see clearly many things that I see now.\nShe began to see things (and herself) differently as she wrote them down. In fact what she thought was her story; her own understanding of her life as she was living it was so different from the truth. Upon seeing this striking contrast, she notes that the ‘[gods] used my own pen to probe my wound’. I give you this recommendation: Try writing for yourself; you’ll certainly be humbled.\nIntrospection (whether guided or not) clearly has some benefits. It’s this “labor of sifting and sorting, separating motive from motive and both from pretext” that can open up a new outlook on life — and on self. If done carefully and well, there’s no telling the good things that could come out of it. Unfortunately, introspection through writing was not enough for Orual; it was only the beginning of the change she desperately needed and I believe it’s insufficient for us as well.\nIn the second part of the story, Orual recounts events that happened after diligently retelling her past from since she was young. These events include (and are not limited to) marvelous visions (or was it dreams?) that the ‘gods’ gave her. The visions were powerful and they were paradigm shifting. Though the visions were not mainly about herself, they had the capacity (strangely enough) to show her who she really was. It’s as though she, for the first time in her life, saw her true self in a mirror. In fact, in one of her visions, a somewhat magical mirror is held up in front of her eyes and what she saw was unpleasant and totally unexpected to herself — and to us, the readers.\nThere’s something which upon first thought appears absurd: one must look away to be able to see oneself!\nLet’s remember that she was the queen of Glome! She was anything but uncultured nor unsophisticated enough not to be ‘self-aware’. Orual was very intelligent and she had plenty of resources at her disposal and she was definitely surrounded by the smartest people in the land who would have advised/educated her about her blind spots. Isn’t this already enough to say that the best and the brightest friends or hired specialists have limits in terms of sharpening our view of our selves? Sometimes (and more often than not) the people that most shape our worldview are the ones with the power to truly distort it, rather than clarify and sharpen our vision. It’s not because of their evil intentions (although that can also be the case), but rather it’s in spite of their good intentions. Even when they do mean well, their vision just isn’t necessarily better than ours.\nLooking back at Orual’s visions/dreams, I reckoned that there’s something which upon first thought appears absurd: one must look away to be able to see oneself. Introspection can illuminate, but it is not the silver bullet we’re searching for. In fact, some of Orual’s conclusions about herself were not only wrong, but they were dark, depressing and paralyzing. Introspection, even if guided, sometimes illuminates, but only dimly. Other times, not only does introspection obscure the truth, but it also brings along toxic dark clouds over us. It turns out that what we need is exactly what Orual needed: more than a few dim lights here and there, but the blazing glory of divine revelation.\nTo be fair to Lewis’ story, the divine visions that Orual received were not orchestrated so that she gets to see herself; seeing herself was a means to a bigger goal. Likewise, for us, the entire purpose of divine revelation isn’t for our private self-knowledge; it is much more grand. In any case, without it, we won’t be able to truly see ourselves. No one can rightly discern his own motives, it’s only through the ‘alive and active, sharper than any double-edged sword’ Word of God that we’re able to ‘judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart’ (Hebrews 4:12). It is sharp enough to cut through layers of pretense and pretext and trauma and pain — no matter how thick or how many. Nothing can be hidden, all is “naked and exposed”.\nHis word is the mirror that you and I need; it is the mirror without which no one would be able to see oneself clearly (James 1:23-24).\n","date":"8 février 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/the-invisible-man-in-the-mirror/","section":"Articles","summary":"Are we able to know the real, unedited versions of ourselves, or do we just settle with only beautified and idealized versions of ourselves?","title":"The Invisible Man In The Mirror","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/ugliness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Ugliness","type":"tags"},{"content":"There once was a man who had three daughters: Orual, Redival and Psyche. The way the story was told interestingly enough only focused on Orual and Psyche — with just only minor mentions about Redival. Personally, I liked Orual — the oldest of the three — not least because she was very intelligent and clearly gifted; even if she seems to have been born with the curse of ugliness, the kind that immediately strikes one’s attention and cannot be ignored nor overlooked. Moreover, her family’s attitude towards her did not help at all as they were almost never so gentle or delicate about it. Orual had always been painfully aware of this.\nDid I mention that the father of the three was a king? Well, he had an entire kingdom at his disposal, which allowed him to at least ensure the best education was provided for his daughters, with a special focus on Orual because, according to him, her intelligence was the only thing going for her and so ultimately her future depended on it.\nIn contrast, Psyche, the youngest (and technically Orual’s half sister) was extremely beautiful. Orual loved her as a mother loves her child and Psyche reciprocated this love equally. They had affectionate names for each other: Maia (which in greek means foster mother) and Istra (the greek name version of Psyche). They were inseparable. Psyche was breathtakingly beautiful. It wasn’t uncommon for the people of her father’s kingdom (mostly mothers) who met her to bow down in “worship” and lay down myrtle ‘offerings’ at her feet in hope for their daughters to be as beautiful as she was: a superstitious act of course that nonetheless says something of the extent of her beauty. She was believed to be a goddess and, in at least one particular instance in the story, people believed her beauty had healing qualities.\nEarlier on in life, Orual made the decision to always wear a veil mostly to shield herself from people’s judgements based on her appearance. People really didn’t know how she looked; she just was the woman in the veil. Needless to say that there was no shortage of speculation about the veil (and what could be hiding behind it), particularly after she eventually became queen in her father’s place. She stuck with this decision to her old age — even after you’d assumed she wouldn’t still care about it.\nBefore she decided to ‘veil up’, she used to believe that she could do little cosmetic adjustments here and there (like holding her hair in a certain way) to make her ugliness tolerable; but in the end she opted for the veil as everything else was too much effort to be maintained for a lifetime.\nI empathized deeply with Orual’s predicament as I’d guess many people would. In our time, we have so much at our disposal before someone considers (the drastic measure) to totally veil up for the rest of their lives: look at how much skincare, makeup, haircare and other products you can buy — and I’m not even mentioning extreme and costly measures of plastic surgery and other devices we purchase to remediate the situation. Men like to pretend they don’t care about such, and on some level it is true that they don’t care as much as women, but they most definitely do care about this — however much less.\nMost times, we leave it to personal taste (and judgment) when it comes to makeup and how much we should alter/adjust/beautify our appearances in general but we know when the altering/beautifying has gone overboard (notably when we cannot recognize the person anymore). Even if we acknowledge the subjective nature of this matter, we can recognize a deep problem when someone comes to the point where their appearance has become too ‘artificial’ and we know that the problem is not in the appearance but rather inward.\nThe story made me think even more about beauty (and ugliness) on a more serious level when Psyche eventually met the ‘god of the wind; West-Wind himself’. I’m skipping many details that led to this encounter; it only suffices for our purposes to note that the most beautiful woman of the time, the best humanity could offer, comes face to face with ‘divinity’. When Psyche tells the story to Orual, she mentions how she felt inadequate, and that she had a sense that her flaws were put in the spotlight. Our flawless goddess for once experiences what your average person goes through daily and gets a glimpse of what everybody else feels every single day: an awareness of one’s defects. Even as Orual kept asking questions, Psyche tells her that it is her mortality that made her feel ashamed and made her feel as if she was a leper.\nOrual couldn’t understand how Psyche could be ashamed of mortality! Aren’t we all mortals? Can we help it? Psyche’s response to Orual’s questions was golden:\n“Don’t you think the things people are most ashamed of are the things they can’t help?” Orual immediately thought of her ugliness and said nothing.\nThe story goes even deeper, but allow me to pause a little and think a bit (in light of this story) about beauty in general. If the most beautiful among us finds herself to be as a leper next to a god, what about the rest of us? Why bother?\nThe thing is, beauty matters for us right now, in front of other people; we couldn’t care less how we look next to “gods”. It matters how it makes us feel right here and right now, and we need the confidence and self-esteem we get through it.\nOn the other hand, we have many warnings to keep in mind. They’re to those who make beauty an end in itself, or the ultimate thing.\n“Charm is deceptive and beauty is fleeting…” Proverbs 31:30\n“A beautiful woman who rejects good sense is like a gold ring in a pig’s snout.” Proverbs 11:22\n“Don’t let your beauty consist of outward things like elaborate hairstyles and wearing gold jewelry or fine clothes, rather what’s inside the heart — the imperishable quality of a gentle and a quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight.” 1 Peter 3:3-4\nKing Saul was described as “a handsome young man as could be found anywhere in Israel, and he was a head taller than anyone else”. But God said this about him:\n“…Do not look at [Saul’s] appearance or his height, for I have rejected him. The Lord does not look at the things people look at. People look at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.” 1 Samuel 16:7\nIn my opinion, the above verses are not saying that outward appearance is totally meaningless; after all it is God himself who creates people to be beautiful, and He perceives it to be good. I also understand the verses as warnings and reminders of this “inner beauty” which not only matters even more (to God and to fellow people) but also is something we can work on; or if you will, something that we can actually help with. But can we really help? Not quite.\nThe story goes on to tell us how Orual finds out that she also cannot do anything substantive to improve her inner beauty and how she finds it to be much like her outward appearance. Late in her life, she also gets to meet “gods” and is surprised by the ugliness of her inner self. She then resolves to be better and become a good person:\nI would set out boldly each morning to be just and calm and wise in all my thoughts and acts; but before they had finished dressing me I would find that I was back (and knew not how long I had been back) in some old rage, resentment, gnawing fantasy, or sullen bitterness. I could not hold out half an hour.\nThis haunted her and reminded her of the time when she use to try to mend her outward appearance by the way she did her hair and the colors she wore. She comes to the terrible realization that:\nI could mend my soul no more than my face. Unless the gods helped. And why did the gods not help?\nRemembering her lifelong celibacy (because of her ugliness) this discovery exasperated her depression and the dark perception about herself. Her inner monologue goes on:\nNo man will love you, though you gave your life for him, unless you have a pretty face. So (might it not be?), the gods will not love you (however you try to pleasure them, and whatever you suffer) unless you have that beauty of soul…\nWhat a helpless state she found herself in — and so do we.\nForgive me for the late mention: The story I’ve been telling is a “Myth Retold” by C.S. Lewis in his book “Till We Have Faces”. A stupendous work. Orual undergoes much ‘soul work’ afterwards and eventually is liberated and experiences some sort of healing that allows her to finally remove the veil.\nIf it had not dawned on you, you can’t really do much when it comes to your inner self as well. This inner “imperishable beauty” mentioned above is actually not the fruit of our efforts. It doesn’t matter the flood of ‘self help’ material we’re currently drowning in, what our feeble attempts do is only hide our shame behind “filthy rags”. Here’s scripture’s poetic echo of that very fact:\n“Can an Ethiopian change his skin, or a leopard its spots? Neither can you do good who are accustomed to doing evil.” Jeremiah 13:23\nWe started with outward appearance, how much we value it (and rightly so), the unfortunate truth of how fleeting it is, how vain it can become and how helpless we are in terms of enhancing it. What I realized through it all is the fact that whether it is from this story or from the Bible, the two types of beauty cannot be separated; that is, you can’t talk about one in a meaningful way without talking about the other. They always go together. They can’t be disentangled. It’s as though it were God’s (merciful) intention when He made it this way.\nThe good news is we’re not left totally helpless, left with our ugliness and the utter shame that comes with it. Our desire to be beautiful will ultimately be reaffirmed (and not discarded). He clothes us with His own beauty; which does not originate from ourselves (lest we take pride in it or cause the envy of others) rather, it is a gift of grace, a heavenly clothing over our hideousness, “a crown of beauty instead of ashes”.\n..You will be given a new name by the Lord’s own mouth. The Lord will hold you in his hand for all to see — a splendid crown in the hand of God. Isaiah 62:2-3\nWe shall not be left to rot though we are vile and repulsive. It is true that though the light of God’s glory for the moment is a treasure that is carried in ‘jars of clay’ it won’t always be like that… The Lord who was transfigured in his human body and had his face “shine like the sun” and his clothes dazzling white like light will likewise make us shine like the “brightness of the heavens”. The One who made the face of Moses, one who was still mortal, radiant in His glory, will make our perfected, resurrected and glorified bodies as well radiate “like the stars forever” (Daniel 12:3).\nWhat of our present shame? Well…\n“Those who look to him are radiant And their faces shall never be ashamed.” Psalms 34:5\n","date":"4 janvier 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/on-the-shame-of-being-ugly/","section":"Articles","summary":"Beauty matters — even if some pretend it doesn’t. But why exactly?","title":"On the Shame of Being Ugly","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"4 janvier 2025","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/shame/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Shame","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 décembre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/child/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Child","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 décembre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/child-like/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Child-Like","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 décembre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/children/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Children","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 décembre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/mind/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Mind","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 décembre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/thinking/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Thinking","type":"tags"},{"content":"Jesus once prayed like this:\nI thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. Matthew 11:25-26\nI mulled over this prayer for a while wondering why it seems as though wisdom and understanding are cast in such a bad light. Why does it sound like Jesus is anti-wisdom? Why bother thinking and studying about the things of God when the resulting understanding will only put a thick veil over our faces? Why bother aspiring to be wise?\nIn C.S.Lewis’ excellent novel ‘Till we have faces’, the high priest of the pagan goddess ‘Ungit’ decries the king’s top adviser’s opposition to him when he draws from his intellectual Greek reasoning. For the high priest, what’s evident at the end of the day is that Greek wisdom “brings no rain and grows no corn”. (The land was going through severe famine and pestilence among other things). This wisdom which is dry and dispassionate and not alive enough to “give them boldness to die” was of no use. The Priest continues:\nHoly places are dark places. It is life and strength, not knowledge and words, that we get in them. Holy wisdom is not clear and thin like water, but thick and dark like blood.\nIt seems as if God himself wants to keep the realms of ‘faith’ and that of reason completely separate. One would argue that no one, in the entire biblical corpus, ever received a commendation for being smart and witty. However, we have many that are praised for their faith; especially in circumstances when the faith in question demanded going in the opposite direction to the path of reason; they are the “heroes of faith”. So what’s the use of all the intellectual labor, especially when God says things like this:\nFor my thoughts are not your thoughts Neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.\nIsaiah 55:8-9\nBeyond the question of intellect versus faith, and coming back to Jesus’ prayer above, it weighed on me (most probably because of my toddler son) that I should get the meaning of being as “little children”, not least because Jesus doesn’t make it an option:\n“Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” Mark 10:15\nWhat is it then about children (as opposed to the wise and understanding) that graces them with the revelation of hidden things? What is it that they have, the thing without which no one can enter God’s kingdom?\nFirst, I’d like to hope that Jesus doesn’t imply we should remain literal (perpetual) babies. It is obvious He’s only speaking figuratively as He does in many other places; notably when He calls us to be like sheep, or like doves, or — believe it or not — like serpents (Mat 10:16). Taking it all literally would be very strange — if not erratic.\nMoreover, speaking of serpents, for Jesus (and for the rest of the Bible), snakes are rarely cast in a positive light: You can be assured the saying “You brood of vipers” that He uttered elsewhere was not a compliment. We need to be careful then with his imagery and only take it to mean we should only emulate snakes in one particular aspect and sheep in another — and doves, and children.\nAs a case in point, the Apostle Paul reminisces (poetically) the time when he “spoke like a child, thought like a child, reasoned like a child” (1 cor 13:11). However, now that he’s become a man, so he says, he “gave up childish ways”. Beyond emphasizing the fact that we shouldn’t be children in all ways possible, this passage gives us a clue on what aspect of being a child should remain in childhood: a weak and undeveloped intellect! There must be growth! We shouldn’t be “children in our thinking”, he says elsewhere.\nPaul is also aware of an obvious danger that comes when we “mature” in our thinking. He knew the danger well enough to put up the warning sign: “knowledge puffs up”! He adds few paragraphs later that someone could “understand all mysteries and have all knowledge” but himself “be nothing” (1 cor 13:2). Side note: It’s bad enough when one “has” nothing, but “being” nothing is truly a deeper level of awfulness.\nKnowing full well about these dangers, Paul nevertheless doesn’t discourage the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. Just because reckless driving is a serious danger, it doesn’t mean we should altogether avoid learning how to drive at all cost. That would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.\nLikewise, in the prayer quoted above, Jesus surely doesn’t wish there was more ignorance and gullibility in people for them to be in a position where they could receive the ‘revelation’. He wasn’t looking for babies in grown up bodies. If that was the case, then his countless rebuking people for “not understanding” when they should have and his constant laments that they “have eyes but fail to see” and “ears but fail to hear” would make no sense. Jesus expects people to have discernment and the ability to grasp deep realities — something one shouldn’t expect from children.\nI could talk about the numerous times I read scholarly works defending views I perceive to be wrong. I did sometimes acknowledge the brilliance of their work, even as I, still on rational grounds, maintained it all to be false. The logical acrobatics, impressive as they were, were only pushing what they truly loved. And going back to our car analogy (the one that’s recklessly driven), our hearts (loves, desires…) are really what set the course; they are, if you will, the real drivers.\nI maintain that Jesus and Paul (and Isaiah) are not complaining about those who bring in too much intelligence in the things of God and therefore they need to check their clever little heads at the door. This is not what’s going on. I suggest that it is the content of our hearts, and not the content of our brains (however much useful) that is ultimately judged.\nJesus and Paul do not wish there was a little more childish naïveté and confusion, but they wished there was less pride and stubbornness and arrogance (which were the real drivers behind their intellect). Jesus wished they remained humble and open to instruction — as little children — and Paul wished they remained “as innocent as infants” when it comes to evil. The religious scholars did bring up a number of valid questions (some of which are still wrestled with to this day) and it’s my opinion that Jesus wasn’t dismissive of their learning and intelligence; neither was He of their questions! However the questions only masked their evil intents; and so, they weren’t asking in order to learn (as children would) but in order to incriminate.\nJust as it was then, so it is now: our Lord sees deeper than the surface level of the seemingly intelligent questions and speeches and personas we put out. He sees the envy, pretenses, jealousy, pride, power plays, greed, abusive behaviors, obsession with power, particularism, etc. He sees it all however much veneer of intelligence and sophistication we use to cover it all up. And it is this evil drive, which the childlike are innocent from, that is ultimately judged.\nThe same Lord also requires that we grow up in discernment and wisdom, keeping in mind that He never says good things about things that do not grow, or mature and ‘bear fruit’.\nTherefore, let nothing deter us from cultivating clarity and precision in thinking (about the things of God); let’s not fall into seemingly spiritual and dark mysticism that give no place for knowledge and understanding and discernment; let’s not be tricked into contrasting faith and reason as if they’re always separate and will never be reconcilable, but in all, let’s take care of the heart that is driving us, ensuring that it is as pure and innocent as that of children, and let God (in his word) lay bare its true motives and true loves.\n\u0026ldquo;And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that you may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ.\u0026rdquo;\nPhilippians 1:9-10\n","date":"15 décembre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/we-should-not-be-like-children/","section":"Articles","summary":"We get life and strength from ‘holy places’ — and not knowledge and words. But is that really so?","title":"We Should Not Be Like Children","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"13 octobre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/commandments/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Commandments","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 octobre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/duty/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Duty","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 octobre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/laws/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Laws","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 octobre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/rules/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Rules","type":"tags"},{"content":"This should be an easy one — and hopefully also short. I say “easy” because it will definitely seem obvious to some, but I write this because I wished I was quick to think along these lines and provide a fitting answer a little while back when it actually mattered.\nA co-worker shared with us, as we were making casual conversation, that she’s not a religious person because the whole idea of a god “demanding” exclusive worship and love does not register well with her. She argued, as an example, that no parent could inflict such bizarre and egocentric command (ordering your kids to focus only on you) as it stands in the way of their well being… Kids must be free to play. Even if it is possible there could be a God — a fact which she didn’t seem to doubt — this attention obsession of His seems, from her perspective, more pathological than something worthy of our adoration.\nIf this behavior is unacceptable to parents, so we wondered, what makes it okay for God? What makes it okay for him to demand our total devotion, or even threaten us if we do not pray to him? What does it say about this God when He knows that threats of incineration (for those who believe in hell’s existence) can only produce fear in us, and we know ‘There’s no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear’!\nThese are good questions. No one ever loved because they were forced to do so. The idea of being ‘forced into love’ even sounds like an oxymoron. In the few years I’ve lived, I’ve never seen this aspect of dominance and oppression as the starting point of a (healthy) romantic relationship. Truly, if this is the way things are, then how is this God loving? Why would we worship such a God?\n*[Jesus] said to him: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind”. This is the greatest and first commandment. —Matthew 22:37-38\n”You shall have no other gods before me” Exodus 20:3*\n• • •\nI would really empathize with above sentiments when they’re presented this way, but this doesn’t come close to how things truly are and, if it’s not obvious, allow me offer some perspective.\nOur first problem with all of this, I think, is the discomfort that lies in the fact that God ‘commands’! Why ‘commands’? Won’t God rather have people ‘be free’ (whatever that means)? It’s not in human nature to delight in rules, and He should know — if indeed He’s our creator. So why still resort to this especially if the goal is to compel our love?\nIt’s not like we are incapable of acknowledging the usefulness of rules; after all without them, no society (including those that call themselves ‘free’) would survive. However, what makes “rules” and “laws” necessary in this scenario is the concern for peace and order. Our struggle is seeing these rules and laws (meant primarily as tools to avoid chaos at all cost) brought in the context of love and adoration.\nParents (since the parent-child relationship was brought up) do put up (rigid) rules for their kids to follow. Rules in this context are surely not tools for mass control, but rather, as any sensible child would later on look back and confirm; signs of love and genuine concern for our well-being. Why then not assume that the Lord loves us in such a way (if not more) when He issues commands? He is, after all, infinitely wiser, more powerful and loving than our earthly, human, and sometimes clueless parents. Moreover, His love is proclaimed to be superior to that of a mother of a nursing child (Isaiah 49:15). Wouldn’t it then be safer to assume He is better placed to determine what our ultimately good is?\nThe second problem I discerned is located in the ‘strange’ nature of the commands themselves. How can I be commanded to love? I can’t be forced to love someone. I can’t be forced to feel anything at all for that matter. These things come naturally. But do they really? Well, I think our emotions and feelings are more complex than we give them credit; they’re not that simple and there should be some nuance.\nWhat do I mean? Let’s consider for a moment the kind of love that is between husband and wife. No one (in their right mind) would joyfully allow their spouse to “love” others the same way only reserved for them. We cannot give them this kind of “freedom”. In a sense, there’s a way your spouse “must” love you. Yes; they must! Are we then exaggerating when we ourselves “command” to be loved? Not at all! In this case at least, it’s absolutely normal to “demand” exclusivity. In fact, I’d go out on a limb and say that it would be immoral not to.\nIn addition to this, there’s the irony in the fact that as much as we’d like to protest against this appearance of narcissistic behavior in God, we forget that we have our own versions of threats in place should our spouses even dare consider loving other people in a way only reserved for us. We cannot tolerate any “disobedience” to this rule. Not even once! Most times, as we probably have witnessed it, there’s no mercy when it comes to the slightest hint of transgression(s) in this area.\nWhat am I trying to say? Is God my husband/wife? Not at all. However, I find it very interesting that His relationship with his people is described mainly as a “covenant” — which is not less binding than a marriage. His love for his people is said to be stronger than death and what binds him to his people (unlike the marriage bond) is to be lasting into eternity (past and future) — go figure!\nWhen we frame his loving commands negatively with such reduction and carelessness (usually for emotive effect), it only shows our inability (or perhaps our unwillingness) to perceive and accept a glorious reality even as it stands right in front of our eyes. His love is deeper than we’d imagine — parent/child and husband/wife relationships, however intimate, pale in comparison. They are only shadows. His is the substance. We should know that however much confusing it seems or however much difficult it is for us to understand; the Lord is humble even as he commands, He is lowly and serves us even as He rules over us.\nHe’s the one we must love because He is the one who loves us the most — and the only one worthy of our ultimate love!\n","date":"13 octobre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/you-must-love-me/","section":"Articles","summary":"The idea of being ‘forced into love’ is an oxymoron. Or is it? Are ‘love’ and ‘duty’  to be kept completely separate?","title":"You Must Love Me!","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"14 septembre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/skye-jethani/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Skye Jethani","type":"tags"},{"content":"I recently learned of one interesting story in the life of Benjamin Franklin. As part of his exploration of electricity, he created a lightning rod that can be fixed on top of tall buildings (at the time, mostly church buildings) to redirect the energy from the lightning strike to the ground, thus protecting the building itself.\nThose days, church buildings were frequently damaged by lightning strikes and in many cases, the buildings would catch fire (as they were most times built out of wood) and be completely destroyed. You’d think that 18th century people welcomed the news of Franklin’s invention with such gladness and relief, and you’d be wrong — and that’s the interesting bit of the story. The ‘superstitious’ belief of the day was that lightning was God’s sign of judgment on the sin of the church and that Franklin and his rod were somehow standing in the way of God’s will.\nBefore we laugh off and dismiss this superstitious nonsense as something that doesn’t belong in our modern times, Skye Jethani (in one of his ‘SKYEPod’ episodes ) helpfully drew a parallel between Franklin’s story and the Covid lockdown debate that some churches faced few years ago when they wondered whether to accept government mandates to wear masks and whether or not it would be a sign of rejecting the faith and lack of trust in God (or if it’d look as giving in to government overreach and other such conspiracy theories). We really aren’t that much different, or that much more evolved from people of previous centuries as we’d like to think.\nJethani also used this story to talk about the concept of certainty: on one hand we have a group of people that is completely sure its understands the meaning of lightning and its implications and on the other hand we have a Benjamin Franklin who is “curious”, inquisitive and capable of questioning and rethinking commonly held assumptions and exploring alternative interpretations.\nAccording to Jethani, there is a quality that makes one reject absolutism and makes one question given assumptions. It is a sort of humility that accepts that one doesn’t know everything and that in turn opens oneself to other possibilities that can turn out to be for the better. There’s also, in contrast, a kind of certainty that ironically closes the door of understanding and wisdom on you, it isolates you and like-minded people in a perpetual echo chamber of confirmation bias; it is a certainty that flirts with stupidity.\nSkye Jethani was very insightful in his analysis and I understand his plan to focus, in that particular episode, on this wrong kind of certainty (I’d have preferred he used the word “stubbornness” instead). The story was very helpful (and the lessons drawn from it), but it’s my view that balancing this perspective a bit is called for. Let me explain.\nI agree that there should be a place for questioning one’s own beliefs and pre-suppositions, but the goal, as he repeatedly said, shouldn’t be to reject them but to know for sure that they can hold water against what could be seen as contradicting evidence. If we don’t allow our views to be put under a microscope, then we’re the arrogant people Jethani is rightly rebuking. This kind of certainty that isn’t open to scrutiny is one I also do not wish to have.\nHowever, in my opinion, all “certainty” isn’t bad and I think that casting certainty as entirely and completely negative can in turn create a kind of paralysis whereby one cannot believe anything, because one can’t be absolutely sure of anything as we cannot know anything exhaustively. Unless full, total and absolute knowledge is acquired (which can never be attained no matter how thorough our explorations), the logical thing would be to always doubt, constantly aware that our knowledge is shallow and unreliable, continuously ready to completely rethink everything from scratch and accept to never be certain about anything. All should be held loosely, and we should always expect, at any moment, new information that will potentially shift our paradigms and surrender to a life of perpetual doubt. But could anyone live like this?\nI think this is an untenable way of life and I think no one practically and actually lives like this. If we turn back to Benjamin Franklin, it won’t be wrong to suppose that he must have reached a level of certainty in particular about the anatomy of lightning. Perhaps he was humble enough not to conclude that his groundbreaking study of electricity could never be improved, but we can safely assume that he never doubted his lightning rod and its usefulness.\nThere are those who doubt all sorts religious propositions, but their agnosticism is certainly not about doubting every tiny aspect of life. Life has a way of pushing us to look for a place to ground it because it can’t all be shifting sand. And if we’re made to look for a place to lay our roots, perhaps that is an indication that a solid ground somehow somewhere exists!\nIn addition, how is it that the God who is all-knowing talks to us as if we can have convictions or as if we have the capacity to know some things for sure? Why does He address us in such a way, knowing full well how little we know and understand? Why does He commend unwavering faith and steadfastness? Why does the Bible say that He is “displeased” by double-mindedness and by those who are “tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine”?\nMoreover, this God goes above and beyond to sustain us and is ready to rescue us when we’re in doubt. He is the one who gives us faith and “holds us fast”. By His Spirit we have “assurance”. Would it be wrong to conclude that His will is for us to really be certain? He has guaranteed that heaven and earth will have to first pass away before “the smallest letter, or one stroke of a letter” of what He said becomes unreliable. In fact, the very first Psalm portrays the man He blesses as a firm and stable tree that is not shaken, contrasting it with the “wicked” man who is as unstable as “chaff that the wind drives away”.\nCertainty isn’t equivalent to stupidity. Therefore, we should not hesitate to live, as Karen Swallow Prior puts it , as people with ‘fierce convictions’. Certainty isn’t a ‘sin’ and it is certainly not the opposite of faith. It is human, commendable and faithful!\n“Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” Hebrews 11:1\n","date":"14 septembre 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/you-dont-need-to-be-certain/","section":"Articles","summary":"If we’re made to look for a place to lay our roots, perhaps that is an indication that a solid ground somehow somewhere exists","title":"You (Don't) Need to Be Certain","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"11 août 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/benjamin-storey/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Benjamin Storey","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"11 août 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/blaise-pascal/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Blaise Pascal","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"11 août 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/jena-storey/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Jena Storey","type":"tags"},{"content":"A s I thought about the common saying that “knowledge is power”, I wondered about the meaning behind the power referred to. Is it power over other people, over evil, over things, or over the world in general? Or is there some other kind of power I’m missing? Moreover, is that power (whatever it means) supposed to be our motivation in our pursuit of knowledge?\nThe best advice you’ll hear from creators/inventors and otherwise knowledgeable people is that only the passion about a particular subject is the fuel that can keep the engine of inquisitiveness running. We also like this advice, as it seems to tell us that only such pure motivation can sustain us and that the rest will only be good for only a short burst and never suffice for the long run.\nWise though the advice is, we all know there are other reasons, some noble and others despicable, that are driving our desire for knowledge — some of which also seem to be capable of sustaining a lifelong dedication to learning. It could be on the one hand the necessity to survive (literally or figuratively), the desire to alleviate pain and suffering, solve difficult problems and make life tolerable; but it could be on the other hand that knowledge can be weaponized to command the fear and submission of others for various gains (financial, military, etc.)\nSince many things can sustain and even push forward the boundaries of our collective knowledge; the fact that the saying that ‘knowledge is power’ became common speaks volume about human nature. If the end result is the same whether our motives are pure or not, why do we have a saying that seems to appeal to our selfishness become our go-to way to encourage people? Why draw from vice and not encourage virtue instead? Makes one wonder…\nIn any case, we’ve observed, especially in this era of knowledge work (where knowledge is capital as opposed to manual labor) that this ‘power’ comes with its perks — and they are significant! And since knowledge pays very well, we might as well stop pretending that altruism is our guide, and we can go get what we truly want: wealth and status.\nLook around you and consider how we pursue knowledge. People are almost always studying. All kids go to school. Businesses are on the lookout for the brightest minds. Powerful governments invest in the best institutions of learning and fund research to maintain (if not increase) their dominance on the world stage. If you need to find a place in this world and ‘make a name for yourself’, then by all means, get knowledge; and it’ll help you accumulate more than others. It’s almost as though the realization that omniscience goes hand in hand with omnipotence fuels this frenzy.\nHowever, knowledge isn’t easy to get. Schools are expensive. Time is scarce. Discipline and mental ability sometimes are lacking. Life brings its own challenges and demands that come in direct competition with this pursuit. Bodies get tired and sometimes the knowledge is inaccessible. Considerable effort (whether of time or money) can be invested but it’s no guarantee that it will pay off. It also turns out — and many have attested to this — that luck plays a key role.\nThis doesn’t deter us from searching. It is a narrow and thorny path. And we know that. But like most valuable things in life, nothing comes easy, and we are not afraid to fight and work hard and suffer whatever we must to acquire this jewel that is knowledge; it won’t be in vain.\nOur consciousness of our own mortality and our awareness of our ignorance make us unhappy; we cannot learn to die, or rest our well-made heads on the pillow of ignorance… No psychic equilibrium is possible for a being whose desires so radically outstrip his possibilities… Misery follows ineluctably from an honest estimate of the gap between what we want and what we are.\nI think Benjamin and Jena Storey brought out this point more eloquently in the quote above from their book “Why We Are Restless: On the Modern Quest for Contentment”, as they were exploring the life and thought of the sixteen century’s Blaise Pascal who invites us to be honest and embrace discontentment and dissatisfaction and relentless as our lot. That’s what we should expect according him, and we would do well to get acquainted with frustrations about the number of things we don’t know and that we probably will never have the time to learn.\nBy no means was he encouraging us to leave the search and stay ignorant. After all, as is often said, “ignorance is bliss” isn’t it? For Pascal, that would be wasteful! In fact, he argues that it is in our nature to fight idleness. Should we pursue knowledge? Absolutely! But with the expectation that we will never escape the frustration of not being able to know everything!\nPut the soul at rest, and it longs for activity; put the soul in motion, and it longs for rest. In neither does it find contentment. Pascal in “Pensées”.\nThat is an honest but bleak picture! Where does that leave us?\nThe way I see it, knowledge truly is power. With every mystery of the universe that we manage to unlock, we’re “empowered” to do things differently or solve previously unsolvable problems. But at the same time, our eyes are open to an entire universe of knowledge we didn’t even know existed before and that we most likely cannot tame in our lifetime. In short, knowledge also highlights our human weaknesses and limitations.\nPerfect knowledge — even if we put our heads together — is unattainable. Trying to reach for it is like trying to bridge over the Niagara Falls with only a broken ladder. Omniscience belongs to the Eternal one and therefore, not for us time-bound creatures.\nTo God — whether you believe in Him or not — only belongs all knowledge. Whether we want to use knowledge to serve or have others serve us, this knowledge belongs to Him, and we were only given a glimpse into it. Whether we do good or evil with the glimpse, it all ultimately and totally belongs to Him; we’re only stewards, and according to His Word, we shall give Him an account.\nOnly when mindful of God are we at peace when knowledge eludes us, resting in the fact that He knows it all and has it all under control. Only when mindful of God are we able to truly lay down the will (and burden) to “become like God” and be satisfied within our limits as creatures meant to worship the all-knowing Lord.\n","date":"11 août 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/knowledge-is-not-power/","section":"Articles","summary":"We cannot learn to die, or rest our well-made heads on the pillow of ignorance…","title":"Knowledge Is (Not) Power","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"8 juin 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/hell/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Hell","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 juin 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/john-milton/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"John Milton","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 juin 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/jordan-peterson/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Jordan Peterson","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 juin 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/paradise-lost/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Paradise Lost","type":"tags"},{"content":"I n episode 1769 of his very popular podcast, Joe Rogan hosted Jordan Peterson, a Canadian clinical psychologist, author and speaker. In their conversation, they touched briefly the subject of deceit. Peterson argued that one never succeeds when one lies and goes even to the extent of saying that it is borderline psychopathic and Machiavellian when one considers manipulating people to their own ends. Rogan was not convinced as he thought about all businessmen and politicians that must bend the rules to make it. He pressed on by pointing to the fact that we have people in various sectors who use deception and all kinds of evil while still having the appearance of having made it. Should we consider, for example, dictators (who are literally occupying their respective land’s highest offices) to not be successful?\nPeterson responds like this:\n… only if you think ruling over hell constitutes success… and this is what Milton’s Satan said “Better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven”. Kim Jong Un… Yes; he’s a ruler. What’s his domain? Hell! #1769(02:13:46)\nPeterson of course here has in mind all sorts of wrongs that go beyond deceit. Whenever we want to do something wrong, as he says in one of his lectures, it is like ‘trying to distort the fabric of reality’. To him, we can never get away with toying with something that is obviously too big for us; hell is the inevitable result for those who try.\nIn John Milton’s epic poem ‘Paradise Lost’ (which Peterson refers to), Satan is talking to his ‘lieutenant’ Beelzebub, trying to convince him hell is a better place for them than heaven. He says this:\nHere we shall rule undisturbed, and in my opinion,\nTo rule is something worth wanting, even in Hell:\nIt’s better to rule in hell than be a servant in Heaven.\nSatan, previously a heavenly archangel, who swapped ‘heavenly light’ for ‘mournful gloom’ somehow manages to be glad that he’s the one in charge in this domain and that he gets to call the shots even if it is over a desolate, miserable and horrendous bottomless pit.\nThe profound nature of Milton’s poem struck me with even greater force when I encountered the same quote again in “The Great Divorce”, a fabulous work of allegorical fiction I personally ranked the best book I read last year. In the key passage, C.S. Lewis writes this:\n…The choice of every lost soul can be expressed in the words “Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven”. There is always something they insist on keeping even at the price of misery. There is always something they prefer to joy — that is, to reality.\nI asked myself if (and how much) we are like Milton’s Satan? I saw how, even in daily small matters (never mind big ones), we choose misery over and over again, usually for something we deem, in the moment, to be of more value. Perhaps we’d rather win an argument and humiliate people and have our relationships suffer in the process rather than listen to one another patiently and with a readiness to humble ourselves and apologize should we be found in the wrong — thereby showing how we’d rather have war instead of peace. And, coming back to the earlier case of deception, we’d rather manipulate people if we stand to gain, showing we’re indeed no different from Satan who chooses hellish discord rather than joyful harmony — except, thank God, for the fact that at times we regret our deeds and seek to amend them.\nIt is true that we recognize a bit of selfishness in ourselves but, as far as our perception takes us, nothing to be compared with the level of malevolence found in this Satan. We’re not that bad… And perhaps we’re right because after all, Milton’s Satan launched a full-on war against God almighty — and we’re not this proud and delusional.\nHowever, if we daily make choices that show we’d rather stay selfish and not learn how to love, or that we’d rather display pride and not learn patience, kindness and goodness, then it doesn’t matter what we think we are, it is our actions that make a case of who we really are: people who choose hell and not heaven.\nMilton’s Satan mounted up an army to fight the Lord’s angels to have him dethroned; even if he could never succeed. But he tried. And daily, we decide whether we fight for the good or the bad, whether for God’s reign or Satan’s. The choice is made here and now, in our normal day-to-day experiences, and not in some hypothetical world. Every day, we decide whether we want God’s dominion or not; we decide whether we’ll humble ourselves under God’s rule or not.\nWe daily choose whether by God’s help we’re going to be faithful and trustworthy servants seeking other people’s good or we choose the hell that is injustice, exploitation and dissensions that are characteristic of any place where each is pursuing his own interest at whatever cost. We decide whether by God’s help we’re going to seek a righteous rule or if we want the hell that is tyranny. We decide whether we’re going to live godly and holy and self-controlled lives or whether we want the hell that is the recklessness in self-indulgence manifested in drunkenness, immorality, rage, etc.\nIt’s for this reason I found Lewis’ statement below (from the same book) to be spot on:\nAnd that’s why, at the end of all things… the Blessed will say “We have never lived anywhere except Heaven”, and the Lost, “We were always in Hell.” And both will speak truly.\nEach day we’re given, we choose whether we’re going to seek God’s “kingdom and righteousness”, or whether we’re going to seek for the hell that is our self-assertion — which inevitably sets us against each other, as we seek to establish our dominance.\nOne thing became apparent to me; it is not by surprise we ‘are sent’ to hell. We don’t “end up” in hell as if by accident when it has been what we freely preferred all along. Hell is only a continuation of our daily choices. C.S. Lewis, few paragraphs later, rightly concludes:\nThere are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, \u0026ldquo;Thy will be done,\u0026rdquo; and those to whom God says, in the end, \u0026ldquo;Thy will be done.\u0026rdquo; All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.\nThanks be to God that in the end, the Lord’s dominion will be absolute, from everlasting to everlasting, and every rebellion and evil crushed. I only don’t want to be purged together with the evil that is ever challenging his righteous rule. So, brethren, “Be not deceived” into thinking that there’s a place for anything (or anyone) that now displeases the Lord of glory, for, as Paul says, “wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 6:9)\n","date":"8 juin 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/rule-or-serve/","section":"Articles","summary":"To rule is something worth wanting, even in Hell: It’s better to rule in hell than be a servant in Heaven.","title":"Rule or Serve","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"8 juin 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/the-great-divorce/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"The Great Divorce","type":"tags"},{"content":"In Book V of Confessions, Saint Augustine prays like this:\nBut in your wonderful, secret way, my God, you had already taught me that a statement is not necessarily true because it is wrapped in fine language or false because it is awkwardly expressed.\nHe prayed like this when he was evaluating the Manichean theories of the day, found them a bit lacking but was hoping that a certain man called Faustus (considered the expert in the matter) would enlighten him. When Faustus arrived, Augustine was struck by his mastery of language and his eloquence. He was delighted by ‘the ease with which he found the right words to clothe his thoughts’, he not only applauded it, but also ‘perhaps did so more than most!’\nHowever, he wasn’t easily swayed. According to him the ideas\n… seemed to me none the better for being better expressed, nor true simply because they were eloquently told. Neither did I think that a pleasant face and a gifted tongue were proof of a wise mind.\nExperts do not always make the best teachers (or communicators). People who have deep knowledge of a given subject, sometimes, for various reasons (that we won’t bother going into), lack the ability to speak with clarity in front of an audience. But, on the other hand, we have those who have a shallow grasp on the subject but are nevertheless able to dazzle their listeners with their flawed logic. These are the dangerous people I want to talk about.\nI say ‘dangerous’ for a good reason. Augustine later on got a chance to speak with Faustus privately and pressed him with difficult questions which he surprisingly and unashamedly admitted that he had no answers for. Despite the honesty, Augustine is thankful to have been spared from the trap that is Faustus; a man who, in his own words, “had been a deadly snare to many”.\nA few weeks ago, I experienced the same thing while watching a talk in which the speaker was so captivating to the point that I had to pinch myself several times, reminding myself that what he was saying was utter nonsense. In addition, I’ve written before1 how the same phenomena played out in Nazi Germany when Hitler rallied crowds behind an evil cause and was able to mask deception with ease. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, with his deep mistrust of charisma, instead wanted a ‘serious exploration of questions’, a ‘pure, abstract theorizing, in the attempt to grasp a problem in its fullness’.\nI’m not about to rehash my previous thoughts, but want to instead probe how this happens. How do we fall miserably under such spells and drink this kind of poison?\nThe coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with… all wicked deceptions for those who are perishing, because they refuse to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore, God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false. 2 Thessalonians 2:11\nThe first book of kings records the story of the death of King Ahab (1 Kings 22) who was flirting — or should I say obsessed — with the idea of invading the land of Ramoth-Gilead. He got himself hundreds of prophets that were ready to tell him what he already wanted to hear, with the exception of one prophet named Micaiah whom he hated for the way he always prophesied negatively about him.\nDespite Micaiah’s stern warning, Ahab went to war and died on the battlefield.\nTruth is truth, whether it is popular or not!\n“The heart wants what the heart wants,” So they say! It will even find hundreds of ‘prophetic’ voices to justify its craving. It won’t listen to reason if its foolishness can be legitimized by alternative (and plausible) excuses.\nThe heart wants what the heart wants. It doesn’t find truth glamorous enough but instead prefers the hypnotizing power of lies and its eloquent and charismatic proponents. It chooses what sounds so pleasing to its itchy ears and what plays well with its (fallen) desires and passions and definitely does not worry about the desolation that is sure to follow.\nTruth can be rejected, not because it doesn’t make logical sense, but purely and simply just because it is not ‘loved’! So, beware of your emotions and your loves as they come to influence what you believe.\nDo not get me wrong; truth is more beautiful — even though we scarcely choose it. It’s way more glamorous than lies any day. We just don’t see it at first because we are\n…like an 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 sea. We are far too easily pleased.\nC.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory.\nSo what would my advice be?\nFor starters, since we’re so much in danger of accepting lies because of the way they play with our cravings, we should ask God to search our hearts; to open our eyes and show us if we’re holding onto illusions. I also find going back to history (relevant to the ideas at hand) to be very helpful. There’s hardly anything new in this world; ideas might be wearing new clothes (which is just a veneer), but at their core, they’re still the same. Chances are that the stances we take today have been taken before. So, how did it work out before? Did it turn out well? Some lies have taken centuries to be debunked — and no one will live that long. It is true what they say: “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” In addition, I consider it to be a good idea to listen to warnings and opposing views very carefully; even if we do not like them. For each worldview, there’s an opposing one. Let us not close our ears to disagreeing voices, as is the custom for so many of us. Having that kind of patience to listen to different perspectives can probably save us from ourselves. Most people don’t have a good grasp of their own views. Therefore, in addition to all the above, I’d suggest spending extra time to search diligently and carefully in order to get more clarity and sharpen our understanding. If you’re right about your views, this will serve well to deepen your roots, and provide more stability against ‘being tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine’. See this article.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"24 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/beware-of-eloquence/","section":"Articles","summary":"A statement is not necessarily true because it is wrapped in fine language or false because it is awkwardly expressed.","title":"Beware of Eloquence","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"24 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/charisma/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Charisma","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"24 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/eloquence/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Eloquence","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"24 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/lies/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Lies","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"24 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/worldview/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Worldview","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"1 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/direction/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Direction","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"1 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/james-k.a.-smith/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"James K.A. Smith","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"1 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/purpose/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Purpose","type":"tags"},{"content":"O n February 11th 1914, Captain Edward Johnson of the Old Dominion Line steamship Monroe occupied the witness stand for over five hours, testifying in front of the United States congress on the ramming and sinking of his ship in the freezing waters of the Atlantic. It was discovered that the ship’s steering compass ‘deviated as much as two degrees from the standard magnet compass’. In the one year that Johnson was captain of the ship, the compass was never adjusted and on that tragic day it drifted into a thick fog, causing it to be rammed by another merchant vessel. It eventually sunk not long after that and forty one lives were lost that day. The story serves as a cautionary tale and, as James K.A. Smith put it, ‘a moving reminder of the tragic consequences of misorientation’.\nSmith uses the story to illustrate how our hearts (defined as the ‘control rooms’ of the self), much like compasses, need regular recalibration if we are to avoid such wreckage. I couldn’t agree more. To use another image; we are much like musical instruments in that we’re neither by default nor automatically ‘in tune’— in fact, if we let things take their natural course, the instrument will go out of tune all the time if the musician doesn’t keep at it.\nPart of the reason why I loved Smith’s analogy, is the indisputable fact that life is a journey. We’re all on our way, we’re all heading somewhere. The Monroe shipwreck could serve as a reminder that we need to attach much importance to moments of pause, rest and reflection; moments to examine our ways, evaluate how we’ve been ‘sailing’, question if we’re still on track or if we’ve taken some sort of detour. These moments of recalibration need to be regular and intentional; they must become a discipline; one without which the drift from the way will be for a moment only subtle and gradual, but the wreckage certain and inevitable.\nUnfortunately, this tale can be thought to be just about this small lesson; this life hack teaching us how to keep a ‘focused’ life. If that’s the case, this would be, from where I stand, the weakness of the analogy: The fact that it rightly pictures life as a journey needing direction, but wrongly assumes a known (perhaps even an obvious) destination — James K.A. Smith’s book ‘You are what you love’ where I got the story from is certainly not guilty of this shallow take!\nGranted, the lesson we learnt was very important: Regardless of the destination and without regular recalibration and frequent tuning, no one will make it! This already certainly speaks volume about our broken sense of direction. True and helpful though this reminder is, questioning the destination is, in my opinion, of much greater importance!\nWhat I mean is, if the analogy was just an efficiency tip, or if this was just a nice way to tweak our inner compasses, would any of this matter if the destination is wrong to begin with? What would be the use of all those optimisation techniques if we end up in a place we didn’t want?\nReally, where are you going? Do you ever ask yourself that? I sometimes hear motivational speeches telling us that we get to ‘set our own course’ and ‘determine our destiny’, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. If our natural sense of direction cannot be trusted (because of the constant recalibration required, even if we suppose that the destination is known), what makes us confident that we know by instinct where we’re supposed to go?\nLet’s think about it this way: If you’re thrown in the middle of an unknown ocean on a small raft, good intentions and courage and strong will coming from your friends in the next raft won’t help you. They’re just as limited as you are. No one truly knows what’s beyond their eyes. The sheer vastness of the ocean is enough to render our efforts useless. Do not be deceived when you see people who seem to know for sure; they might be rushing to their ruin. You don’t get to decide where salvation is to be found either. You need outside help, you need external intervention if you’re ever to find your way. You need a map, and a well calibrated compass, and the knowledge of where you are on the map; without this, your options are limited.\n“I know, O LORD, that the way of man is not in himself,\nthat it is not in man who walks to direct his steps.”\nJeremiah 10:23\nFirst century Palestine saw a man (thought to be a prophet) walking around calling people to ‘follow him’ — as if He knows the way. Many of his close disciples were first called to leave their occupations to (once again) ‘follow him’. He knew sometimes it would require self-denial and a daily ‘taking up of a cross’, but He often insisted that we have to choose to suffer whatever we must to ‘keep in step’ with him because, as He once said, ‘wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it’ — hence his frequent expressions of compassion on people following ‘blind guides’.\nOn many occasion, He calls people to change their directions and follow him; it seems to be at the core of his message. He kept telling people to repent of ‘their ways’ — which essentially meant they needed their lives completely turned around; i.e. a complete change of direction. He also said that only He was able to “forgive sins”: Sinning defined as missing the mark, aiming wrong — a kind of misdirection. He really came to save the lost!\nHe wasn’t like anyone who was ever able to commend a large following any other time in history. He wasn’t your average moral teacher either. His claims were of a more provocative, outrageous and outright offensive nature! Not only was He claiming that He knew the way, but He claimed He was the way — and the only way! He declared that not following him meant staying lost, and that there was no other hope! C.S.Lewis was right to say that to make such claims, you must either be a lunatic, or really be who you claim to be — Lord! If He is right, only He is the a leader — in the truest sense of the term. And if He is right, we need only do the only thing He insisted upon: Believe!\n","date":"1 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/there-are-no-leaders/","section":"Articles","summary":"Here’s an account of what happens when we nonchalantly forge on in the wrong direction. Just who are we following? Are we sure we’re not lost?","title":"There Are No Leaders","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"1 mai 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/you-are-what-you-love/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"You Are What You Love","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 avril 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/conflict/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Conflict","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 avril 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/disagreement/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Disagreement","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"13 avril 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/frienship/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Frienship","type":"tags"},{"content":"Y ou may have formidable skills and, as Paul says, understand all mysteries and have all knowledge; but if you lack love, you are nothing. Things that we consider to be remarkable will pass away, but love never ends. It will abide. So in all that you want to be and become, make sure you are loving!\nThat being said, I also agree with N.T. Wright who often (frustratingly) notes how the word ‘love’, in English at least, is made to carry fifteen job descriptions all at once. And he is right — pun intended! The word is so deep, people write entire philosophical volumes about it. It means so much but somehow, as often said, ends up meaning nothing. The word is simultaneously profound and vague, clear and ambiguous; use it in a speech and people will attach different meanings to it — and there’s little you can do to ensure the one you intend is the one they pick. Is it then of any surprise when eventually people re-evaluate their relationships when they realise they have different views on what love means and how it is shown? People who thought they were aligned on a matter, discover, to their dismay, how different they are.\nThis is the kind of conflict I want to look at; the kind that comes between close friends or family members. See below some scenarios I have in mind:\nA couple refuses to dance to the tune of their teenage daughter’s temper tantrums and decide to assertively address the situation by disciplining her instead. She feels like she was never loved to begin with. Two very close friends part ways over (questionable) life choices made by one of them, who’s left feeling judged, betrayed, and (again) unloved. Someone refuses to attend his brother’s gay ‘wedding’ because of his christian convictions and he’s told (by his brother, parents and virtually his entire family) that he should throw away his backward, extreme, divisive, intolerant and (once again) unloving views. He’s advised to balance and cool down his views with compassion and realism. Besides, aren’t Christians supposed to not judge? Didn’t Jesus himself hang around tax-collectors and sinners? Who’s now too holy to witness two sinners express their (and here we go again) love? A church excommunicates a person on the basis of immorality, but the outside looking world can’t see it any way other than how sanctimonious and (again) unloving the church has become. But to the church, believe it or not, the action was a difficult decision made out of love and they had to carry it out as they “mourn”. Before we go any further, you may not agree with the way I bundled all these examples together as if they’re one and the same. You may feel, and rightly so, that these are complex matters to be addressed separately. It is not my intention today to address any of the scenarios mentioned, however, I’d like ponder on a common thread between them. In each case, I notice a kind of separation, or, if you will, a boundary drawn that causes us to question the concept of love.\nIt is not hard to understand why. Love supposedly bears all things and covers a multitude of sins. It welcomes people as they are — rather than ostracise them. Love truly accepts people with their weaknesses and wrongs in kindness and compassion — rather than draw boundary lines. Love unites; it brings people together — rather than dividing them. Love does not consider people as projects (to work on, to change, to fix), but rather it presents its arms wide open and loves on them — A tautology for sure, but I had no choice. All this world needs is love!\nTo be fair, most people know that things are much more nuanced than this. For example, how can you throw all support behind (self) destructive actions of an infant you care about? That, and most people would agree, would be unloving! This tells me that sometimes, not only are we going to draw lines out of love, but we will (if it comes to that) willingly (but reluctantly) inflict pain.\n‘Of course it makes sense to punish a child over whom one has authority and who doesn’t know right from wrong’, you might object, ‘but this isn’t applicable for an adult’! ‘Who appointed you morality police’? ‘Who gives you the right to impose your values on others?’ ‘Is it really your place to decide what’s good and bad for other adult people capable of making decisions impacting their own lives on their own?’ ‘Also, why do you like to fight? Why can’t you leave people in peace?’\nObjections are many!\nNevertheless, I find much wisdom in this proverb: “profuse are the kisses of an enemy”, but, “faithful are the wounds of a friend” (Prov. 27:6). And since we’re talking about friendships; we know we’d rather have an honest rebuke than flattery (Because what would be the use of the friendship without honesty?) People don’t always know right from wrong but they’ll always benefit from genuine love; the kind that pushes a friend to risk disappointing them hoping to save them from (costly) mistakes they’re not able to see. Perhaps a good friend is the one that fears the evil and danger in front of you (that you’re not seeing) more than losing the friendship. And this is exactly the point of the proverb above: love sometimes requires a sort of audacity; a courageous and steady hand to wound (however much counterintuitive it seems)! In other words, unconditional support for others is perhaps not ‘love’, and those who think so might turn out to be at best blind as you or at worst cowards and real enemies.\nOnce again —and I can’t stress that enough— we must be careful about this view of love (that wounds) just as much because behind it could hide an ugly kind of self righteousness and an inflated sense of your own moral superiority… Moreover, and especially for people holding positions of authority over others, this could be a perfect tool to abuse, manipulate and control others. In fact, this has been done so many times that we dread conflict solely because we don’t want people thinking we’re in this category.\nIn addition to this, there’s also the fear to get it all wrong — and the following shameful regret to have antagonised people unnecessarily! This feeling is, in my opinion, commendable. It is a sign of humility and maturity if someone keeps in mind that they are not infallible! However, the fact that no one is infallible shouldn’t paralyse us into believing we can never get things right! Our fallibility shouldn’t stop us from having strong convictions. Here’s a question: would you rather support your friend in a grave mistake because there’s an unclear and remote possibility that you’re seeing things wrong or would you rather act out of courage and wound your friend because you fear more the threat that is clear and unmistakably in front of your unsuspecting friend?\nLove, it seems to me, is much more than warm fuzzy positive feelings towards people. It requires a (balanced) blend of humility and strong convictions and courage and grace… And who can do this perfectly on the first try without help?\nGod is love — a fact which warms every heart. Yet, it is easy to find those who question His love — usually with sentences starting with ‘If God is truly loving\u0026hellip;’ But since God himself (whose love is pure and perfect) is misunderstood, I guess we will never stop misunderstanding each other. Nevertheless, let me leave you with these two pieces of advice:\nNo matter how close our relationships, conflict is inevitable. And that’s especially true for people who (can) have different perspectives on an issue. What I consider fine could be seen as harmful by other people. It’s of no use to consider them judgmental (see the irony?) and close your ears to what they could be lovingly trying to prevent you from. It would be helpful to listen and understand the objections and not hold it against them — even while you disagree. Could love mean embracing even when you’re judged? To the one who’s doing the ‘wounding’, be aware of the delicate procedure that it is. Get advice from others. Consider kindness and grace above all (and not rash, impulsive reactions). Plead and mourn. Don’t condescend or disdain. Remember, you’re trying to win them over, so tremble but also be steady as you oppose your loved one! Love is not easy. May we be and continue becoming a truly loving people.\nFeatured Image credits: Focal Foto \u0026ndash; Flickr ","date":"13 avril 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/i-love-you-but-i-judge-you/","section":"Articles","summary":"Love bears all things. Why do people judge the ones they love? How is it that love sometimes doesn’t withstand conflicts?","title":"I Love You. But I Judge You!","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"30 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/death/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Death","type":"tags"},{"content":"W hat would you gain if you were able to accomplish something seemingly impossible? What would you benefit from it? Should you be enshrined in the annals of history as one of its greatest, why would that matter to you?\n“What do I gain if, humanly speaking, I fought with beasts at Ephesus?”\nPaul, 1 Corinthians 15:32\nPaul’s question isn’t for those who have the luxury to ask it; those who, as it were, managed to fight with beasts at Ephesus. It’s not a question for those who ‘made it’ and now have nothing left other than ask if it was worth it. It is for us all. Paul is wondering why attempt to do it in the first place, he asks why take on a challenging task? What’s there to gain in being ambitious?\nThis is a pertinent question. As limited human beings, our accomplishments can only reflect our limits. We’re prone to error, we cannot see far into the future and we are limited in time, resource, energy and knowledge—to mention a few. Even if we put our heads and resources together, our output can only reflect these limits, and therefore, can only serve for a short time and eventually be discarded. No matter how beautiful, creative, groundbreaking or useful; the fruits of our collective labor are bound to get spoiled. We’ll never make something perfect, and so, we shouldn’t expect anything we do to be of lasting value.\nAnd here’s another (sad) fact to top it all up; the fact that we’re soon to die and not even enjoy the fruits of the few things that we worked hard on, things that could benefit the next few generations. It seems that the sooner we accept the reality and take things lightly, the better and happier we will be. This makes for true realism. But this doesn’t make for an encouraging thought, does it? If anything, it makes for a gloomy and depressing attitude towards everything.\nWhy even think about death at all? Shouldn’t we try not to think about it and push it as far as possible from our minds? The wise man tells us why:\nIt is better to go to a house of mourning than to go to a house of feasting, for death is the destiny of everyone; the living should take this to heart.\nEcclesiastes 7:2\nWatching the short film “A 97-Year-Old Philosopher faces his own death” on YouTube sure makes for a sobering moment. Granted, the body dies, but in the end, he kept wondering, “What is the point of it all?” Death, somehow and inexplicably, has the strange power within itself to make you question everything and make it all seem vain—regardless of when it comes. It leaves you wondering “What is the point of it all?”\n“Absolute futility,” says the Teacher.\n“Absolute futility. Everything is futile.”\nWhat does a person gain for all his efforts\nthat he labors at under the sun?\nA generation goes and a generation comes,\nbut the earth remains forever.\nEcclesiastes 1:2-4\nVery nihilistic isn’t it? People will certainly want to shake themselves from this grim reality by offering hopeful alternatives — and of course to get there, you’ll have to abandon (or rather go beyond) reason into the realm of faith. Whether the hope offered is founded or not is another question worth exploring because no one wants bury their heads in the sand and base their lives on wishful thinking.\nWhat are these alternatives? By far the most popular answer suggests that hope belongs only to the soul that is going to heaven! For everything else material, there’s only despair. Everything here will be destroyed, and nothing we deem important will survive. It was all corrupted anyway. At the core, so the idea goes, we are spiritual beings; and the ‘flesh can never inherit the kingdom of heaven’. We shall leave everything behind for the bliss of paradise; for an incorruptible and unfading new world that only our souls will have access to. Therefore, in the here and now, only ‘sacred’ work matters; all that work which is not soul related work— what we call “secular”— is unfortunately pointless; a ‘striving after wind’.\nYou are…oiling the wheels of a machine that’s about to roll over a cliff. You’re… restoring a great painting that’s shortly going to be thrown on the fire. You’re… planting roses in a garden that’s about to be dug up for a building site.\nN.T. Wright, ‘Surprised by Hope’. Adapted.\nChristians all around the world will celebrate tomorrow an event as a result of which the world was never the same: Christ, on that hallowed Sunday morning, rose from the dead! He comes out with a body that is strangely new and with surprising new properties, but also, and recognisably so, like the old one.\nUnfortunately, for the purposes of this article, we won’t examine whether this miracle really happened or not. I can only say that from the various sources I have consulted, there are (overwhelming) historical evidences that this really happened. This is something we can really believe in.\nWith this reality in mind, Paul’s picks up his thoughts on the beasts at Ephesus in this way:\n“…If the dead are not raised, ‘Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die’”\n1 Corinthians 15:32\nWe are to eat and drink and be merry indeed, if death is what in the end wins; for there’s nothing else to live for: no point (no meaning, no value) in doing anything right now. Thank God in Christ Jesus it is not so; the Lord conquered death, our last enemy, by rising from the dead!\nBy this great miracle, He re-affirms the goodness of the material creation. Our bodies are therefore not to be considered as carcasses for the soul; only good to be thrown away and submitted to decay when the soul (which is considered as the thing that really matters) is finally set free by death. Our bodies are not like dirty and shabby clothes that we shall be glad to get rid off either. The hope is, for all who believe in Him, resurrection. The hope is, in other words, not incorporeal.\nNo work that brings beauty, justice and equity will be in vain! And if the bodies that we consider weak and soon dying will be resurrected, then everything else— not least what we do in this body— matters. Our professions are not simply just means to feed a body that will soon rot, but our labor which seemingly was for a momentary purpose will be relevant even in the age to come.\nTherefore, to the one who believes, work isn’t a curse; it isn’t a necessary evil; it’s a calling with a purpose that will last forever. No work that brings beauty, justice and equity will be in vain (for those who believe!) So, labor, my friend! Work on your craftsmanship because since Jesus rose from the dead, all is significant in the light of eternity.\n“I don’t know how my planting a tree today will relate to the wonderful trees that there will be in God’s recreated world… I do not know how the painting an artist paints today in prayer and wisdom will find a place in God’s new world. I don’t know how our work for justice, for the poor, for remission of global debts, will reappear in that new world…”\nN.T. Wright, ‘Surprised by Hope’\nHow will this be? I re-echo the words above from the good bishop: I don’t know. We’re left with images to represent what will be. It will be as the grain of mustard seed; feeble, vulnerable and apparently insignificant. It eventually dies and out brings a large tree in whose branches birds in the air make nests. It will also be like a caterpillar that metamorphoses itself into a beautiful butterfly.\nLikewise, as our work feels insignificant and bound to be futile, and just as its impact seems to only last for a moment; in the Lord, it will raised into eternal significance! At the moment, work might be too entrenched in layers of corruption and apathy for any light of goodness to burst through; but in the Lord, all will be brought up, with the same power that brought Jesus out of the realm of darkness and death!\nIn everything— and not just the work aspect — we’re bound to find reason to be frustrated. However, that will not be the end of the story. For Paul, in what’s commonly considered as the greatest chapter in the Bible, there are explosive ramifications of Christ’s resurrection on the entire cosmos:\nFor the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and the glory of the children God.\nRomans 8:20-21\nIs there anything as hope-infusing as this?\n“Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.”\n1 Corinthians 15:58\n","date":"30 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/it-will-all-be-worth-it/","section":"Articles","summary":"No matter how beautiful, creative, groundbreaking or useful; the fruits of our collective labor are bound to get spoiled. What hope is there for us?","title":"It Will All Be Worth It","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"30 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/light/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Light","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"30 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/meaning/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Meaning","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"30 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/resurrection/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Resurrection","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"30 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/souls/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Souls","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"30 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/work/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Work","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/byung-chul-han/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Byung-Chul Han","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"17 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/happiness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Happiness","type":"tags"},{"content":"Everyone wants to be happy. However much elusive the concept of happiness might be, we at the very least all know that we want it. But what is happiness? Most of us don’t think much about this question seriously; we just settle with an image of what a happy life looks like and pursue that—without questioning the image, who painted it, or whether or not it’s an illusion. Should you ask people around you to describe happiness, these words will come up more often than others: love, passion, fulfilment, bliss, joy, rich, meaningful, freedom, etc.\nTo most people, the words ‘faith’ or ‘God’ won’t make the above list as they don’t seem to end in happiness—or even seem to be related. Religion doesn’t project freedom or fun or happiness, rather it seems restrictive, prohibitive and ascetic. So, why should we bother? Today, I really want to question the need to talk about faith and God—and by extension, the need to write about it\nIn hindsight and after 6+ years hiatus from this blog, this should should have been the right place to (jump)start. But I digress.\nSo why bother? Happiness is not about being able to engage in fun activities every day and all the time; most people know that—or more precisely they know that’s not realistic. Having fun is not to be neglected obviously, but we know there’s a kind of seriousness in work; a laboring on something important, meaningful and fulfilling that is a crucial ingredient to happiness. And it makes sense, doesn’t it? Wouldn’t we want to wake up every morning, highly motivated and committed to accomplish great things? Isn’t pushing beyond the status quo and ‘changing the world’ such a worthy aspiration? This, without a doubt, makes us feel empowered to take matters into our hands and puts us again behind the wheel to shape our own lives and make it interesting for ourselves. It avoids the passive ‘let-me-wait-for-destiny’ kind of approach to life by giving us an active, ready-for-action attitude, broadening our minds and enabling us to dream big and reach for the stars…\nThere’s surely a sort of energy and thrill that springs from such a vision of life which is powerful and attractive. It certainly looks better than what’s commonly thought a devoted religious life is about: a life characterised by the seemingly grim and narrow mindedness of rule keeping, obeying commands and self denial. But is it really better?\nByung-Chul Han, a South-Korean philosopher and cultural theorist, writes in his book “The Burnout society” that this “positivity”; this feeling that all things are possible, the feeling that I can make it happen for myself has a certain “violence” to it. According to him, the feeling comes with demands—and hard ones at that. The positivity will eventually grow and become excessive; and before anyone realises, the situation will have escalated to the point of self-exploitation—and here lies its violence. He spoke of course in general terms, but he specifically shows how this violence is at the root (or at the very least points to the cause) of depression, ADHD, and burnout. To him, there’s a “pressure to achieve that causes an exhaustive depression”.\nProfessor Han went on to talk about how our immune system is essentially biologically programmed to kill anything “negative” coming to attack its well being. But we already know that, biologically speaking, we’re not equipped to fight positivity; because why would we? And that’s the insidious thing about this “violence”:\nThe violence of positivity does not deprive, it saturates; it does not exclude, it exhausts. That’s why it proves inaccessible to unmediated perception.\nThis is why this should concern us all, whether you’re at this point or not. The process is gradual and subtle. It creeps up on you before you notice. Besides, he adds, the danger is present even before the positivity becomes excessive:\nIn reality, it is not the excess of responsibility and initiative that makes one sick, but the imperative to achieve: the new commandment of late-modern labor society.\nAh. There it is! I feel as though he really hit the nail on the head on this one. This is truly insightful. He affirms the fact that even though we don’t appear to be under anyone’s rule, it doesn’t necessarily imply that we’re free. In fact, we have another imperative; another commandment (Ironic how we refuse commandments and inflict worse ones on ourselves). We’re facing a new form of slavery, if you will. Although having the appearance of freedom, we’re definitely still subjects. But who’s the master?\nThis labor camp is defined by the fact that one is simultaneously prisoner and guard, victim and perpetrator. One exploits oneself. It means that exploitation is possible even without domination.\nThis really is puzzling. How can we be masters and slaves at the same time? You’d think that we’d be gentle to ourselves, and you’d be wrong. In fact, we’re harsher, more abusive and exploitative towards ourselves? Isn’t that concerning?\nUnfortunately, Professor Han’s prescription wasn’t as insightful as his brilliant diagnosis. But it’s okay; because this right here, is exactly where I find christian teaching to be even more profound.\n“There is a way that seems right to man, but its end is the way of death”\nProverbs 16:25\nWhen it comes to our ability to know what’s best for ourselves, the Bible doesn’t utter flattering words; on the contrary, it only shows us, as Professor Han did (and better), how, jarringly enough, we only end up harming ourselves and wasting the little energy we have. And for this, I’d point to the peculiarity of christian scriptures: its comprehensive understanding of the heart of man and its unparalleled level of sharpness, depth and precision.\nScripture doesn’t swing the pendulum to the other extreme of apathy. Beyond providing a healthy, balanced and truly human view of work and happiness, it tells us who we should work for, the reason why we should work, what makes true fulfilment and the definition of achievement altogether—among other things. Although we won’t dive into how this all works out, my hope in this short piece, is to help point to the despair waiting those who wish to ‘take control’ of their lives and inject a healthy curiosity into the concept of living to ‘serve’ God.\nPerhaps serving God has a better outcome. Perhaps it’s out of love that He “commands” us to serve Him. Perhaps surrendering to God is, as counterintuitive as it may feel, unto the path of real self-fulfilment. Perhaps humbling ourselves under Him would be a lighter burden (than the heavier one we unwittingly carry). And perhaps, becoming, as it were, His “slave” is paradoxically the only path to freedom. If only we heed the Lord’s invitation!\nThen Jesus said, “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you. Let me teach you, because I am humble and gentle at heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy to bear, and the burden I give you is light.”\nMatthew 11:28-30 (NLT)\n","date":"17 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/lethally-positive/","section":"Articles","summary":"Wouldn’t we want to wake up every morning, highly motivated and committed to accomplish great things? Isn’t pushing beyond the status quo and ‘changing the world’ such a worthy aspiration?","title":"Lethally Positive","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"17 mars 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/positivity/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Positivity","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"28 février 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/forgiveness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Forgiveness","type":"tags"},{"content":"I came across arresting paragraph below from Oliver D. Crisp:\n“Jones can forgive her child for a misdemeanor, or punish him. But Jones cannot forgive the child by exacting reparation from him by means of punishment. That makes no sense… You cannot embrace someone by pushing them away, and you cannot forgive someone by exacting reparation from them in the form of punishment” 1\nWhen you forgive someone, what does it actually mean? Beyond the interpersonal level (which we shall come back to shortly), what do christians mean when they claim that Christ died in order to pay for our debts/sins? Doesn’t this line of thinking come in opposition to above analogy from Crisp? Isn’t Christianity’s idea of forgiveness a bit odd? If God really forgave our debts, why does anyone have to pay for them by—and here the strangeness—dying “in our place”? If there is any forgiveness at all in the good Lord, so the idea goes, then there really is no need for anyone coming to die in our place. That would be redundant. Either God is so unforgiving that He needs to be appeased by the death of an innocent man (and who would want to worship such a God?) or God really and actually forgives and there’s no need for a savior to atone for our sins. But the two cannot both be true.\nThe implications could be difficult to live with if such inconsistency in God was ever to be proven true: The thought that God is so cruel and vengeful to require someone’s death; the thought that He’s this much incapable of forgiveness implies that, not only is He not good, but also it showcases His hypocrisy when He commands us to forgive our enemies and when He asks us to pray daily for his forgiveness (that He obviously doesn’t have himself) as we forgive our debtors.\nWell, let’s first work with Oliver Crisp’s example above and dissect it a little bit. We have a child that “sinned” and whose misdemeanor must either be forgiven or punished. We cannot forgive and at the same time punish, but also we cannot forgive by punishing. None of this would make any sense.\nWe need, however, to know a bit more about this incident, don’t we? What is this misdemeanor? Did he not make his bed in the morning? Or did he break the window in his room? If we have a broken window, regardless of whether we punish or forgive, the cost of replacing it will not just vanish. And as a parent, Jones must bear that expense. So in a sense, Jones can “forgive” and “pay” at the same time. Therefore, the two are not (always) mutually exclusive.\nIf you think about it, Crisp’s example actually portrays the Gospel so well. The one who is punished is not the one to have committed the sin. Someone else pays. Someone else, in a sense, “suffers”. And if the sinner (the child) gets forgiveness, it doesn’t therefore imply that the punishment (or the payment) disappeared. Which is exactly what (in very simple terms) the Gospel affirms: we are sinners, we sinned against God, God himself forgives,God himself in his Son suffers and pays.\nI think I now see what I (and many like me) do not often consider when forgiveness takes place. The dynamics that come into play are really interesting and powerful; overlooking them leads us to the initial riddle.\n…you may say, “I forgive you”, but the price of the wrong does not evaporate into the air… Forgiveness means the cost of the wrong moves from the perpetrator to you, and you bear it. Forgiveness, then, is a form of voluntary suffering…\nTim Keller, Forgiveness\n“Voluntary suffering” indeed! This really helps explain how the God gave abundant forgiveness through suffering.\nComing back to interpersonal relationships, anyone who had to forgive something serious understands this very well: there is a load to bear, and it is sometimes heavy; attempts to remove or hide this fact only trivializes what it means to forgive.\nWe’ve been working with an example where there’s a monetary cost implied. However, harm can have an unquantifiable aspect; it could come in form of emotional distress, psychological trauma that could be irreversible, or in short, damage that cannot be remediated through financial means. How would forgiveness work in this context? Consider those who need to forgive a murderer! Since the wrong done is irremediable by nature, then forgiveness means, in this case, letting the murderer go, as the situation is beyond repair: forgiveness will let it all go.\nHowever, this kind of wrong never “evaporates into the air”. Forgiving someone who killed a loved one implies you take on a heavier weight. The price of the wrong is in fact higher; the monetary injuries pale in comparison. Absorbing such loss is more demanding because “paying” it takes more than an instant. In a sense, you must be willing to “burn” inside you all cries for vengeance and justice. You must be willing to accept to be the one “punished” instead of the perpetrator. And that, you must do for a long period of time.\nThis is what convinced me that most of us do not really realize what forgiveness entails. In 2017, Danielle Berrin asked “Should We Forgive the Men Who Assaulted Us?” in the New York Times. Someone, who I think grasped the difficulty in forgiving, commented on the article:\n“Forgiveness… heals [neither] the body or mind… Let the criminals ask his gods, if there be any, for forgiveness… Instead of talking about victims who must forgive, we should be talking about tattooing the words “Rapist” or “Sexual Predator” on the foreheads of criminals—this would actually help make women and children safer.”\nKeller Tim, Forgiveness\n‘But our sins are just misdemeanors’, you may object, ‘they’re nothing to make a big deal out of’. One little white lie for example (as we talked about previously ) is really insignificant; in the grand scheme of things. It is much like not making your bed. Most of us aren’t murderers or sexual predators. We’re not committing anything that God cannot just overlook… That’s if he isn’t petty!\nNevertheless, the Son of God died. And death is too expensive a cost to be paid for just “misdemeanors”! We all know how kids sometimes don’t know when they’re making mistakes—big or small. It’s the reason they’re still kids: They don’t know any better. They don’t understand. Could it then be that we’re like kids who have no clue of the gravity of our “sins”? Could it be that our liabilities are greater than we’d like to admit? Perhaps we underestimate what happens when we commit such a seemingly innocent and insignificant “sin”. But more on this another day.\nThe question we addressed just scratches the surface of the matter; we in fact haven’t even started plumbing the depths of God’s forgiveness. What we were able to establish today however was the fact that God himself bears this heavy load; no one else. Even though the christian account of things has (obviously) way much more to say about this, I’ll close by noting that the Christian good news—the Gospel—not only makes sense of this world, but is beautiful altogether. And if it is true (and I believe it is), the appropriate response to it should be gratefulness and worship to the God who is driven by love and mercy when He forgives to the point of paying this ultimate price for us Himself.\nOliver D. Crisp “Approaching the Atonement”\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"28 février 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/i-ll-forgive-but-someone-must-pay/","section":"Articles","summary":"You cannot embrace someone by pushing them away, and you cannot forgive someone by exacting reparation from them in the form of punishment.","title":"I'll Forgive. But Someone Must Pay!","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"28 février 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/oliver-d.-crisp/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Oliver D. Crisp","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"28 février 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/tim-keller/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Tim Keller","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"16 février 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/dietrich-bonhoeffer/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Dietrich Bonhoeffer","type":"tags"},{"content":"T o tell the truth or not to tell the truth? Here’s the ethical conundrum: Should I always speak truthfully no matter what? Should I, under no circumstance, never ever lie? Is this question even that important?\nLet’s dive right in.\n“As long as I’m not the one being lied to, or as long I’m not too naïve to be taken advantage of, then occasional little white lies here and there are really harmless, and not much to be made a big deal out of”, some would tell me. As for “big” lies, it all depends on the repercussions and whether or not I’m causing more harm than good by telling the truth. So, common sense is required in each case.\nOn the other hand, some will quote for me: “Thou shalt not lie!” (It’s somehow more convincing in King James English). The command is clear and unambiguous. Only those with strong religious convictions actually believe this. Most times we all end up lying (especially when it serves us); but for these people, living a life of integrity is a serious question. They’re not naïve nor are they blind to the fact that truth sometimes costs and they’re willing to pay.\nSo, which is it? But first, let me tell you what got me thinking (or why we’re talking about this in the first place).\nDietrich Bonhoeffer was a Christian minister turned spy in Nazi Germany who thought that those who are of the (legalistic) view of never telling a lie are narrow minded in regards to common sense but also in regards to the biblical teaching that they claim to follow:\nIt is only the cynic who claims “to speak the truth” at all times and in all places to all men in the same way… He wounds shame, desecrates mystery, breaks confidence, betrays the community in which he lives, and laughs arrogantly at the devastation he has wrought and at the human weakness which “cannot bear the truth”.\n“Ethics”, Bonhoeffer D. Quoted from “Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet,Spy” , Metaxas E.\nHis biographer Eric Metaxas gives us an example of a time Bonhoeffer managed, against the Board for the Regulation of Literature guidelines, to publish a book that contains pro-Jewish views—this was heavily censored Nazi Germany time. He achieved that by pretending that the book was a pure disinterested scholarly exploration; yet in actual sense, he knew very well that he was implicitly fighting the regime. He considered lying in this case to be God’s will for that time. After all, so goes his reasoning, he didn’t owe the Nazis the truth.\nNow, this really puzzled me for at least three reasons. First, it is commonly thought that lying is just inevitable with the current level of corruption in this world; no matter how good your intentions are—and, by extension, no matter how deep your christian commitment goes (E.g. You must sprinkle a little falsification if you ever want to see your business get off the ground). Secondly, Bonhoeffer is not your average christian minister; if you’ve ever read his book “Cost of Discipleship” (like I did years ago), you won’t find it hard to understand why it is now considered a “classic”. The above is really jarring; coming from a sound theologian of his acumen. Thirdly, this wasn’t a case of uttering lies for self-serving purposes; on the contrary, these were actual dangerous and life threatening lies in service of the greater good. I was ready to listen!\nI thought of two other stories that not only are relevant to this question but also make this question even more interesting. We first have the Hebrew midwives story: they lied to Pharaoh, disobeying his order (out of fear of God) to kill new born Jewish baby boys. God afterwards “deals well” with the midwives(Exodus 1:20). We also have the story of Rahab the prostitute who lies to the King of Jericho in order to hide Joshua’s spies (Joshua 2:5-7). She’s later on listed among the heroes of faith in the New Testament—a faith made manifest the very day she lied.\nWell, then this settles it; you might say: Even the Bible says that it’s ok to lie… occasionally. But does it though? Remember, when lying is explicitly addressed, at least in one occasion, in a yet another story from scripture, a couple; Ananias and Sapphira, died as a punishment(Acts 5). You might suggest that maybe the line is drawn when it comes to lying in church (or to church leaders, or in sacred dealings) but that scripture is realistic enough to make room for lying when it comes to imperfect, corrupt, dirty secular affairs(as is the case for Rahab and the Hebrew midwives). Is this really how we should understand this issue?\nI’d point out first of all that if we read the two stories well (Rahab and the Hebrew midwives), we’ll note that there is no explicit comment made on the act of lying itself. In those two episodes at least, scripture is silent on the ethical question of lying at hand. Granted, God deals well with the ‘liars’ not because of their lies but because of their faith and their fear of him—so really, it’s in spite of the lies. The fact that they’re dealt well with is no divine stamp of approval on the act of lying and neither does it make everything they ever did right. This is to say that I’m not seeing sufficient and indisputable ground for us to consider that the two stories give us green light to deceive.\nIn addition, if you look at these stories from a different angle, you will realize that at the end of the day, God’s ultimate and foretold plan is accomplished—even through the lying dirty business at the very center in each case. In another story, Isaac’s “blessing” falls on Jacob, just as God has planned—despite the web of deceptions that made it happen. Even in the core story of the gospel, the Son of God dies and secures our salvation—despite Judas’ betrayal that enabled it all. In short, yes, whether we like it or not, evil sometimes made possible key events which we sing praises about. But was there any endorsement of the evil done? In fact, in the latter example, there was judgement instead.\nSo then, you might ask, if God can use evil to bring good, why not us? Why can’t we sometimes borrow evil’s own ammunition and have it (as it were) taste its own medicine? As long as our intention is to kill evil… Right? In Bonhoeffer’s case, he was totally and fully confident that Hitler’s death was and will be ‘objectively’ for the good of the whole world (How can I argue with that?) and therefore, in some cases at least, the end justifies the means.\nYou’ll undoubtedly note that I’m now talking about “evil” in general and not just lies, because when you concede for one, you concede for all. Moreover, I’m a bit uneasy with this line of thinking (of occasionally using evil against itself) and I wouldn’t blindly embrace this view for these reasons:\nFirst, it begs the question: Where do we draw the line? Do we now have permission to do any despicable thing as long as it’s in service of good? If there’s a line to be drawn, where is it and at what point do we know we’ve crossed it? Because here’s the thing: we humans are masters at justifying ourselves; we’re able to rationalize just about anything that we do—even if we’re wrong and even when we don’t know we are wrong and (not surprisingly) even when we know full well we’re in the wrong but stand to benefit. Are we then really ready to base our ethics on such frailty, limited knowledge and partiality in judgement? Secondly, how do we know that after a ‘successful’ use of said evil we ourselves do not become evil? It is commonly acknowledged that evil calls for more evil and history is full of such examples: blood calls for more blood and lies call for more lies. Are we certain we’ll be able to restrain from evil when it’s calling for more? Can we guarantee that we won’t be affected by it? Will our conscience and innocence and virtue remain unchanged after that? “Can a man scoop fire into his lap without his clothes being burned?” (Proverbs 6:27). Are we certain we’ll casually walk away unscathed? It is my opinion that we underestimate evil’s power when we are confident in our ability to withstand the power of its corruption. Moreover, even if our motives were pure, how sure are we that deception (or evil in general) will bring out the best outcome? Who’s to judge what that best outcome is? Us? What if someone else has a different view of this ‘best outcome’? Whose version should be best then? Isn’t it misguided when we assume there’s no better outcome just because we can’t possibly think of any? Can we even ensure that ‘best outcome’ we envision is what will certainly happen? Also, hasn’t it ever happened in your own life when what seemed like a bad and horrible outcome (to you and everyone around you) turned out to be the best thing to happen to you in hindsight? Why are we then so confident we’re wise enough to know what should happen all the time? “Am I then supposed to not fight against evil?” “Am I supposed to sit on my hands and let all kinds of evil happen to me when I have the power to avoid them?” That’s far from what I’m saying. Evil is never the desired state of things; by all means fight it. The subject at hand is how we fight it.\nTruth sometimes can also be like a sharp sword in the hands of a mad man, that is to say that it would be foolish to tell the whole truth to anyone regardless of who they are, whether the time is right or not, whether it is fitting for them or if they’re able to handle it or not. For instance, Jesus (who never lied) preferred at times to say something cryptic to crowds (because it’d easily cause a riot) and explain it later on plainly in secret to his followers. So, the Bible offers a wealth of wisdom about secret keeping and discretion (Prov11:13), prudence, grace and shrewdness in speech(Prov12:23); so in short how truth should be communicated matters just as much: e.g. we should speak the truth lovingly (Eph4:15) and discern very well who we’re telling it to (Mat6:7).\nWith that said, I see so much going on with the mere act of lying; regardless of the motive(fear, pride, shame, love, etc.) But one thing is sure, when it comes to the divine command not to lie, there’s more to it than meets the eye—it’s certainly not a narrow-minded restriction as some would think of it. Personally, as I ponder on this issue, and from whichever angle I look at it, I fail to see anything that comes close to the superior wisdom of keeping of God’s command.\nObviously, there’s much more to consider on this and so many questions unaddressed; but my hope is to at least to offer a helpful and general way to think about this issue. It might be easy for me to write this stuff from the comfort of my chair and in a war-free country, but I might fall short of this standard when trouble comes. I better pray and seek God’s help to not fail.\n","date":"16 février 2024","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/you-dont-have-to-tell-the-truth/","section":"Articles","summary":"Is it ok for me to lie sometimes? Do I have to tell the truth all times? Is this question even important? Let’s think this through…","title":"You (Don't) Have to Tell the Truth","type":"articles"},{"content":" \u0026ldquo;One wished to arrive at answers that could stand up to every scrutiny because one would have to live out those conclusions. They would have to become actions and would have to become the substance of one’s life.\u0026rdquo; Eric Metaxas—Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy\nIt is a serious business given to man to be searching for truth and find ways to live by it. As abstract as ‘searching for the truth’ might sound, it is a desire built into the fabric of our humanness. We cannot shake it off, nor can we ignore it, but we all live according to a certain ‘level of truth’ we have arrived to. And whether we have acquired the skill to articulate our ideas or not, our choices are largely determined by what we have considered to be the truth.\nNot to seem too simplistic, it is true that when it comes to actions and decisions, so many variables come into play (emotions, desires …) but mainly, the metanarratives that we adopt—which place us into a story with a role in it—are what largely influences us. We all subscribe (consciously or not) to ideas and philosophies about things; some more important than others; but the point stands clear: we all have our subjective account of things.\nHowever, history has taught us that ideas can be dangerous. If we have a collective adherence to bad philosophies, the repercussions can be massive; even fatal. Some of the deadliest times of our history have been results of a spread of infectious and poisonous heresies in communities and this tells us something very important for our purpose: Truth—or claims of truth—sometimes demand passionate adherence to it.\nTime and time again, we have seen what passion for lies looks like: It looks like blood on our hands, weight on humanity’s conscience and we must learn from our errors. It isn’t because we’re not susceptible to fall into the same traps, but we need, among other things, to call for more care, more inquisitiveness and an openness to scrutiny when our perspectives are challenged. Some things have massive impact on the society in a short time, but other issues are more subtle in the falsehood that they contain and take more time to cause anything built on them to crumble down like a house of cards.\nDietrich Bonhoeffer, then University professor, deeply mistrusted the charismatic and charming qualities of leaders and teachers because he wanted ‘words and logic of what he said to be the only things to which the others responded’. He wanted a ‘serious exploration of questions’, a ‘pure, abstract theorizing, in the attempt to grasp a problem in its fullness’. Bonhoeffer opposed charisma because it obscures the shortcomings in one’s assertions and, most of the time, their lack of substance.\nCharm and charisma and emotions; they all have their place (because we’re not only thinking beings) but they should never be substitutes of clarity and seriousness in the ideas being shared. Added to this, Bonhoeffer was not suggesting cold-hearted emotionally-unattached ivory-tower analysis of issues: his life as a strong opponent of Nazi theology during World War II (something he even died for) suggests the opposite. He worked under this assumption: Truth is serious—just as lies turn out to be—because truth has to be lived.\nI recognize the fact that mere intellect also cannot by itself lead to the truth. Oh how frightful are the mazes of our philosophical acrobatics. Do not get me wrong, as a Christian, our creed never suggests such thing as “Reason alone”. But what I’m suggesting is that it is one’s responsibility to expose himself to what has happened in the past, to what has been taught, to what has been tested by time. We’re called to humility which shows itself by opening our views to scrutiny, as opposed to the arrogance which we all somehow have of ascribing infallibility to all our views about every matter. We believe in our limitations and inability, if left alone, to grasp the objective truth and so we’re called to search with all our hearts and also pray for light to shine and chase away the darkness of our ignorance and unwillingness to accept the truth.\n","date":"31 juillet 2017","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/passionate-eccentric-foolish/","section":"Articles","summary":"Dietrich Bonhoeffer wanted ‘words and logic of what he said to be the only things to which the others responded’","title":"Passionate, Eccentric, Foolish","type":"articles"},{"content":"Doctors without borders organized an interactive exhibit called “Forced from Home”; a project started few months ago simulating (wherever they toured in the U.S.) a real refugee camp environment so that participants get a better understanding and education about what it means to be a refugee. I was inspired mainly about the way they prepared exercises in terms of giving a chance to the participants to get out of their own self-consumed heads and walk in the shoes of someone elsewhere facing life’s most difficult challenges.\nShould you be ‘forced from home’, what would you take? You’re reminded during the exercise that you don’t have time to be comprehensive in your packing. After all, most probably you’ll be packed together with thousands of other people in a bus, or a truck or a boat which means that the lighter your luggage is the better. So choose quickly and mindfully.\nI thought this should be required experiment to all of us in order to be, even if just for a moment, forced to evaluate what life really comes down to. Disaster scenarios give a perspective into who we really are and all the existential crises and emotional trauma we would face were we to be stripped of financial stability, career prospects, family and friends and left only with barely-met vital needs (food, water, shelter).\nSarah Stillman, a reporter who, while acknowledging the benefits of these exercises, she also questioned about the nature of these exercises; how MSF organized them in a way that participants get more than the momentary empathy, i.e. more than the “self-congratulatory chances to momentarily pause from [their] days, quickly imagine what’s like to be one of these [refugees] and then jump back into our lives and pat ourselves on the back that we have done so, but without really any stakes of mind or action really taken…”\nI think the question hits the nail right on the head. It would be a waste of time and money if the effort was not followed by concrete actions. Refugees need more than our pity. But help isn’t cheap. But it is a necessity—as it should, if the exercise proved to be of any benefit. Stillman’s point was to make sure MSF fully uses this opportunity to engage the attendants in real financial care planning/actions for fellow refugees rather than settle for fleeting sympathy.\nOn a personal level, I think that picturing what it is like to be a refugee is in itself commendable. I agree with Stillman that it’s of no use if it’s without “stakes of mind”: an understanding of someone else’s desperation for relief, pain of unquenched thirst and the loss of all that used to be a ground for identity (community, belongings…) must give us an invaluable insight into our own plight—otherwise it won’t be of any use.\n“My whole being longs for you, in a dry and parched land where there’s no water,” said the psalmist while in the desert of Judah, fleeing from Jerusalem—his home. Taking the pain of severe bodily thirst as an index to his need for God is what beats me. Understanding his need for God above getting back all he had is just uncommon. “God is my refuge” he said somewhere else; which implied a bigger disaster if he was to lose the source of all joys and satisfaction and protection and purpose. So, where do you go?\nRefugeehood gets us in touch of our humanness, but most importantly it helps us assess our lives in a way we learn to hold loosely whatever is ephemeral and hold fast, acquire what really matters, what really lasts, what cannot be taken away from you—and God is just that.\n“Your love is better than life…I will be fully satisfied as with the richest of foods.”\nPs63:3-5\n","date":"3 avril 2017","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/embracing-refugeehood/","section":"Articles","summary":"Doctors without borders organized an interactive exhibit called “Forced from Home”; a project started few months ago simulating (wherever they toured in the U.S.) a real refugee camp","title":"Embracing Refugeehood","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"3 avril 2017","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/hunger/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Hunger","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"3 avril 2017","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/refuge/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Refuge","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"3 avril 2017","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/thirst/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Thirst","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"3 avril 2017","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/yearning/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Yearning","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"27 mars 2017","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/a.w.-tozer/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"A.W. Tozer","type":"tags"},{"content":"For the past few weeks I have been reading about various dynamics coming to play in interpersonal relationships, and I’ve been constantly amazed by how the strongest relationships develop out of some sort of common interest. Simple interests can forge deep friendships just by the fact that they’re being held and shared by (two or more) people. What might seem simple, small or trivial to some can be a point of connection for others and form a basis upon which their community thrives.\nNeedless to say that the quality of the relationship will nevertheless be determined by more than one variable: how vital or how relevant is the interest in your daily life, how important it is to you and/or to the other person, how deeply you are invested in it, and so much more. A shared love for coffee can make for an acquaintance, but a common view about politics will set the stage to a deeper fellowship.\nThere’s no way to form meaningful relationships if there’s strong disagreement on the fundamental and most basic issues, “at that point, courtesy and tolerance are possible, but not any deep friendship.” As the relationship grows, it will all come down to a realization that friendship (or love) has flourished simply because the most important thing about you is what the most important thing about the other person is.\nFriendship (or love) has flourished simply because the most important thing about you is what the most important thing about the other person is But, precisely, what is the most important thing about somebody? A.W. Tozer argued that “What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us.” Now, before you roll your eyes at my ‘small-minded/religious’ comment, it is worth noting that the words ‘religion’ or ‘God’ or ‘theology’ are just other terms for ‘worldview’; religion informs—at least it should—about “what life is all about, who we are, and the most important things that human beings should spend their time doing.”\nWhen we think about it, our worldviews are like mental or psychological lenses through which we filter and interpret everything; magnifying or minimizing or blurring or coloring what we see. The question is how correct or how precise is your lens doing justice to reality, how reliable is it in terms of providing the right direction and a solid ground to understand who you are and your place in this world.\nSure your entourage, or culture, or upbringing, but also your own desires and wants play a key role in heavily shaping the way you see everything. You’ll also form connections with other people who see things the way you do—and how great is the gift of sharing a vision? However, just as one can have hallucinations in a desert coming out of his craving for water, we must regularly ask if what we’re seeing is truth and reality or if it is just a product of your lusts and/or socially constructed illusions. But how do we proceed?\nFor Tozer, understanding our creator’s character and nature and purposes is crucial. Understanding who made us, and why he did and what we’re supposed to do in the light of all of this is something without which, were we to gain all kinds of knowledge about other things, we would be, as Piper once said, “infinitely parochial”.\nGod is light; not only because his glory shines, but also because by him and through him, I see everything—the true enlightenment! Tozer was right; our knowledge of God is the most important thing about us.\nAgain Jesus spoke to them, saying,“I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” John 8:12\n","date":"27 mars 2017","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/the-most-important-thing-about-you/","section":"Articles","summary":"As the relationship grows, it will all come down to a realization that friendship (or love) has flourished simply because the most important thing about you is what the most important thing about the other person is.","title":"The Most Important Thing About You","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"18 juillet 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/comedy/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Comedy","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"18 juillet 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/humor/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Humor","type":"tags"},{"content":"I’ve been enjoying reading Os Guinness’s “Fool’s Talk ” , a magnificent book that, at some point, stopped me to think about the dynamics behind human laughter. Laughter, as I realized, is one of (if not) the most beautiful gift from our creator. It brings in balance and sanity to an otherwise serious, unjust, sometimes tragic, difficult and stressful life.\nBut what do we laugh about? We laugh about anything and everything. We laugh because we understand things; “we also know the way things ought to be, and sometimes the difference makes us laugh and sometimes it makes us cry.” That is why a puffed up politician falling down the stairs is a funny scenario while the one where a paralytic falls isn’t. In short, we laugh about the “incongruities” of life.\nAs stated earlier, laughter is a gift, a good medicine. It puts into gear a mechanism to heal emotionally from life’s complexities and contradictions and provides a temporary escape of some kind, if you will. Therefore our minds (and bodies) needs a healthy amount of it to be able to move forward.\nAt this juncture I think it is appropriate to add a word warning that it is very tempting to keep looking for fun instead of facing the problems at hand, and so laughter in this case becomes an addictive substance we’re looking for, requiring more and more consumption but delivers a decreasing amount of joy. The old saying hits the nail on the head when it states that it is better to spend all your days in the house of mourning than the house of mirth—probably because sorrow does justice to life’s reality more than non-stop partying.\nWe need, however, to address that question on a deeper level. What does it say about us, human beings when we laugh? Far deeper than the question about the direct and indirect reasons behind our laughter and what we find entertaining (which is also a good index of our heart’s condition) is the question of what it is that makes us forget, for few golden moments, about our current situation in life and turn our focus on the object of our entertainment. Is it mere escapism? If so escape to where?\nIn the book, Guinness tells of a time he met, in Poland, a survivor of Aushwitz-Birkenau who had converted to the Christian faith in a death camp because there, a fellow prison inmate expressed Christian hope in humor. In prison, people laugh too—even there ‘where nothing seemed to have meaning, let alone a funny side’. In the most depressing situations, there too, although less often than us, people laugh. What does that say about us, human beings?\nMore than we ever think, this laughter is not mere escapism. Could it be a clue for understanding what we are made for? Isn’t laughter a natural expression of aspiration of a better and brighter future—that is if we really believe of a brighter future?\nHumor in the face of death in the case of the survivor of Auschwitz-Birkenau indicated a heart letting go of the concern of the immediate, no matter how dark it was, and grabbing a brighter and stronger reality than death—in this case, life with God after death. Pain and death wasn’t the last word, everlasting pleasures in the Son was his destiny, and so he laughed at the present.\nIn his own words:\nNot for one moment was Auschwitz itself ever something to laugh about. But like a flash lightning or a momentary parting of the clouds, humor lit up a truth that was larger than anything that could happen to the poor prisoners, a truth that even Auschwitz could not sensor.\nEvery time we laugh we acknowledge the importance of something more substantial and weightier than our present settings. It is this inbuilt and compulsive need that we all have to escape the transient—which suggests that this is not all there is and which testify of our rejection of what we now see as the ultimate reality to focus on.\nSo, laugh hard! It is a gift, and I hope you realize it the next time it happens. But on a more profound level, humor, do you now see, was given for a purpose. Yes it can be misused or look like a means of escape; but what if these moments, as beautiful and enjoyable as we might find them, were pointers putting eternity back into perspective?\nLaugh hard! It is a gift to be opened in the moment, in the here and now. It is okay if it makes you forget the immediate and present circumstances; God made you a laughing being. This soon will pass the same way every flower fades. So mount up on your God-given wings of laughter, and like an eagle, fly higher than the present, and ponder and wonder about the eternal. Don’t waste your laughter.\nIs your hope and destiny bright and sure—otherwise why should you laugh?\nLaugh hard, dear reader, it is a gift; but let the gift draw you to the giver of life, future and hope—God, the real and solid ground for laughter.\n","date":"18 juillet 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/laugh-hard/","section":"Articles","summary":"But like a flash lightning or a momentary parting of the clouds, humor lit up a truth that was larger than anything that could happen to the poor prisoners, a truth that even Aushwitz could not sensor…","title":"Laugh Hard","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"18 juillet 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/laughter/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Laughter","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"18 juillet 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/os-guinness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Os Guinness","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 juin 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/addictions/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Addictions","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 juin 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/alcohol/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Alcohol","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 juin 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/drugs/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Drugs","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 juin 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/drunkenness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Drunkenness","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 juin 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sober/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sober","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"20 juin 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/substances/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Substances","type":"tags"},{"content":"I know a man who always asks me for money every time we meet. The sad thing is that we meet almost every time in the morning. And he’s always drunk. It’s not the loose-your-mind kind of drunk that is obvious but it is, besides the fact that I can smell the alcohol, the kind that you can only notice if you pay attention to what he is doing. But to be sure, as he doesn’t deny it, he’s always drunk and lives to get drunk.\nMost people know, or at least have seen a drunkard. It can be sad (or funny, depending on where you’re standing) to observe someone stripped completely of his rationality because he’s drunk, and watching him act foolishly and unashamedly flaunting his folly to everyone’s face. It is forgivable if it is a onetime thing, but the fact of the matter is reality shows us that a drunkard, even in his right mind, yearns for yet another drink.\nBut on a more subtle level, drunkenness is not exclusively caused by substances; which is why things like power, sex, reputation, money … can cause a man to lose his mind. Therefore, I can say that someone is drunk with, say, power to mean that power has saturated and intoxicated his mind to the point of impairing his judgement—he cannot think straight because of the power at his disposal, or the power he covets.\nIf we start thinking of drunkenness in this way, is it not right to think that we’re all drunk with something? Would it be an overstatement if I say that everyone has something of an addictive power which is causing him to lose his mind? Surely, you might not be able to see it just as a drunkard might not know that he is drunk, or people might not be able to tell since they’re just as drunk as yourself. Would this be a plausible explanation on why we’ve become so uncaring, unloving, always fighting each other (as drunkards love to do)?\nIf we take an example, living in a comfortable house might be your ultimate goal to a point of deafening your ears to the cries of the poor for mercy or to the people in your surrounding in need of your generosity. From a generous person’s point of view, you’re drunk with comfort and you’ve lost your mind to it to the point of losing any consideration whatsoever to your neighbor.\nBut make no mistake, a drunkard will always be responsible. We might excuse him for breaking things, or being violent or rude or insolent because we know the reason behind the folly. However before the law, the drunkard is held responsible for all domestic violence or reckless driving or any casualties caused by his drunkenness.\nAsking a paralytic to stand and walk straight when you’re fully aware that that he’s not capable of such thing would be nonsensical and so asking a drunkard to act responsibly would equally be nonsensical, one would argue. Drunkenness is self-inflicted and therefore, before the law, a drunkard isn’t acquitted nor is he justified; he is condemned.\nLikewise, we’ll be held accountable for any strife, jealousy, war, poverty, injustice, immorality, anger, resentment, enmity, rivalries, impurity… caused by our drunkenness (of any kind) before the supreme divine and perfect Judge, just as we’re held responsible in our imperfect and human courts. We’re just and wise enough never to excuse or justify a drunkard’s foolish acts because they were done under the influence of the alcohol, but we demand that the guilty assumes the responsibility of any act he might commit while drunk. Likewise, even if God knows we’re drunk (and the things that make us drunk abound), he still demands obedience to his commandment, holiness and love because He is just and we do not have any excuse.\nHow have we fallen captive to these addictive behaviors? Even good things, when desired, turn into bad things—that’s how jarring our condition is. It seems we cannot sober up even if we wanted to. That’s the truth. We’ve become callous, beings with hard hearts who live in the futility of their thoughts. We’re darkened in our understanding and our hearts has become deceitful beyond repair. What’s our problem? Sin.\nThe good news is that our savior, Christ Jesus, has not only come down to remove the penalties of the evil we’ve committed, but he has come to take us from darkness to light, from bondage to freedom, from death to life, life in abundance.\n“Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!”\nJohn 1:29\n","date":"20 juin 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/the-responsible-drunkard/","section":"Articles","summary":"It seems we cannot sober up even if we wanted to. That’s the truth","title":"The Responsible Drunkard","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"21 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/d.a.-carson/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"D.A. Carson","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"21 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/poem/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Poem","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"21 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/quotes/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Quotes","type":"categories"},{"content":"“Let us pray”, he urged. He took a step back into the pulpit, put his glasses on and lingered for a moment, allowing the audience to repose in the air charged with owe at the weight of the subject of his talk; which, to use his own words, is the very center of the message of the Bible.\nThe right words; ones that will faithfully convey our heartfelt worship, ones that will allow everything that is within us to fully express itself, ones that will do justice to the weight and complexity of the subject, ones that will conveniently embody the proper response of a worshipper; those words —let alone the energy to formulate any—elude us. Prayer in times like this becomes difficult; silence (or hands-lifting) becomes our best option. The old man was wise and gracious enough to craft one prayer beforehand that we, the strugglers, could borrow and offer to God. He found where it was written down and with a calm voice, he started reading:\nDilemma wretched: how shall holiness\nOf brilliant life unshaded, tolerate\nRebellion’s fetid slime, and not abate\nIn its own glory, compromised at best?\nDilemma wretched: how can truth attest\nThat God is love, and not be shamed by hate\nAnd wills enslaved and bitter death—the freight\nOf curse deserved, the human rebel’s mess?\nThe cross! The cross! The sacred meeting-place\nWhere, knowing neither compromise nor loss,\nGod’s love and holiness in shattering grace\nThe great dilemma slays! The cross! The cross!\nThis holy, loving God whose dear Son dies\nBy this is just—and one who justifies\nD.A. Carson\nQuote: Concluding Prayer of “The God who is There-Part 11. The God who declares the Guilty Just.” Sermon available on YouTube ","date":"21 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/the-cross-the-cross/","section":"Articles","summary":"How shall holiness tolerate Rebellion\u0026rsquo;s fetid slime?","title":"The Cross! The Cross!","type":"articles"},{"content":"I watched an interesting interview on a popular YouTube channel in which a few transgender people invited viewers to witness the kind of discrimination they face on a daily basis because of who they are. The message was clear and simple; it was an invitation to accept them because the choices they made did not come easy; it took, as one said, serious reflection and soul searching to finally come to the conclusion that they had to be different to be the “most authentic version of themselves”.\nFor the LGBT community, people who do not accept them are intolerant for rejecting them for who they are—which is a kind of violation of basic human rights. Beside, as one of them asked, ‘who are you to impose your own morals to another human being?’\nI later thought that this is a very complex question than I realized—or probably the other person too. The LGBT movement supposes that all human beings are created equal, which means that no one should come, supposing that they have a higher view of life, and impose their views on other people—which seems reasonable. But this logic alone has its pitfalls.\nAll around the world, we have people imposing their own morals on others. For instance, we know that all human beings are equal. Which is true. But all human beings do not think that way. Some suppose their ethnic group is better than others, for some it is a race issue, for others it’s the social class and still others think their religion is better than others and all those who do not adhere to their religion deserve to die… Dictatorship is evil. But the dictator and his entourage would not agree with this.\nWe believe the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and so democracy should be an absolute everywhere. But then again in a country with different ethnic groups, if the ethnic majority decides, it should be allowed to decimate the few. But we both know it is wrong. But somehow we deem it true that if need be, it is be totally right to wage war against totalitarianism and kill these extremists (and/or racists). Isn’t this imposing our morals on other people?\nThis prompts few other interesting and more basic questions that come to the root cause of the issue. Why do we hold the equality of all human beings as an absolute truth not to be violated by anyone? Where did it come from? Who said that? Why should we obey him? Well, everyone knows this but we don’t seem to be precise on how we know it is true and where it came from. It only seems right to us and it seems that it is the good thing to do. Furthermore, it works for us because a society built on the foundation of this truth flourishes in all kinds of ways. But the question remains, where did this objective truth (it’s sure isn’t subjective) come from?\nWhat if this search for the origin of our morals (or the human rights) pointed us back to God, our creator? What if these were clues purposefully left around by God himself? It has to come from God—and not from our culture. It has to be God. If it isn’t God, what could it be? It can’t possibly come from us because, as Tim Keller puts it:\n“If there’s no God, then there’s no way to say any action is ‘moral’ and another ‘immoral’ but only ‘I like this’. If that’s the case, who gets the right to put their subjective, arbitrary moral feelings into law?”\nIf God, as the one to establish the created order, is the ultimate origin of our morals then, He has a word on all our disputes—including the LGBT issue. He has established these morals and has written them all over our conscience. These laws were wisely established by Himself in his love, for they are designed for our enjoyment and well-being. He, as our creator, above all else, is in the best position to understand what our needs are.\nAlas, we have abandoned him. Our search for identity and purpose doesn’t start from him anymore. It start from us and thus we’ve replaced him. We are the ones to decide who we want to be and how we want to live. As a consequence, although we do not realize it, our rebellion and pride towards him destroys the social fabric.\nPaul, the apostle puts it so vividly in Romans 1:18-32. He has foreseen what has happened to our culture. He says that we already know there’s a God because we’re surrounded by evidence all over the place—we only have to look around and realize it. He adds that no one has an excuse. But we suppressed the truth and we claimed to be wise but instead, we became fools (Rom1:22). He then puts it so poignantly: “Therefore God gave them up…” (Something he repeats over three times). He gave them up in the lust of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies, to dishonorable passions (homosexuality and lesbianism), to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done, with all manner of unrighteousness…\nI don’t have the space nor the expertise to deal in greater detail with the issue but one thing is clear to me: This moral revolution is proven to be morally bankrupt but at least on the positive side, it is pushing us to ask the most basic and urgent questions: who am I? How can I live well and authentically in the light of my identity? What is God’s design (if I indeed believe there’s a God) for my sexuality? What I’m really saying is that we can only start to find our true selves and our true meaning in the loving creator who desires nothing but our happiness—which can only be found in him.\n","date":"16 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/be-different-be-yourself/","section":"Articles","summary":"For those who do not accept them, they are called intolerant for rejecting them for who they are—which is a kind of violation of basic human rights","title":"Be Different! Be Yourself!","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"16 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/identity/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Identity","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"16 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/lgbtq/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"LGBTQ","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"16 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sexuality/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sexuality","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"16 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/tolerance/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Tolerance","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/bible-reading/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Bible Reading","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/darkness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Darkness","type":"tags"},{"content":"Imagine that some kind of cosmic event happens and switches off every possible source of light on the planet. This includes all natural (sun, moon, fire…) and artificial sources of light (light bulbs, electronic devices screens, lamps and torches…). Consider that even our beloved vehicles remain only with the ability to move but fail to produce light, and somehow, even the sophisticated infra-red goggles fail to illuminate the few elites who possess them… This would be chaotic, wouldn’t it?\nIf you push your imagination a bit further, you’ll realize how horrific this would be. You’ll come to the conclusion that, in utter darkness, nothing and absolutely no one would be able to move. Those who try would be exposed (and expose others) to countless dangers (some of them which would be fatal). Every human on the face of the earth would then be condemned to inactivity and a state of mind that can only lead to loss of purpose and meaning and depression. We’d be doomed.\n• • •\nOver the years, I’ve come to appreciate thoughtful people who, in their struggle for meaning, ask good questions. ‘Why are we here?’ ‘Why is there something to do rather than nothing?’ ‘Why was the universe created?’ ‘How was the universe ever able to produce intelligent beings capable of asking the purpose of the universe and everything in it?’ ‘Am I doing the right thing and is that thing worth doing?’ I’ve especially preferred questions that go along these lines.\nWhy am I saying this? Well, I believe that if these questions (and many more) are not personally answered, then I’ve painted above a picture of the world in which you live in—a meaningless world.\nThere’s a reason why God, in his manifold wisdom manifested in the act of creation, decided to create light on the very first day. Light represents the condition without which there can be no dynamic of life. Nothing would be able to flourish without it and everything would be, as the author of Genesis writes, “without form and void” (Gen1:2).\nIn that state of chaos, God said: “Let there be light” and there was light. Out of God’s spoken word, things started to make sense. Beauty and order wouldn’t be known was God’s spoken command not issued. Paul later reveals that even our inner beings wouldn’t have life if God’s word wasn’t spoken this way to give life to our darkened and blinded minds (2cor3:14-4:6).\nHis word makes sense out of the world we’re in; it is the basis for life, meaning and guidance. His word as a literature, “answers major world view questions: who made us? Who are we? How did we get here? What has gone wrong? What is the maker doing to set things right? How will things turn out in the end?”(James M. Hamilton)\nIf the Bible—as the repository of God’s words—brings us a story of this world, and if we’re actors in that drama, then, as Kevin Vanhoozer puts it so eloquently , “The Bible is what provides stage lighting…the means by which we see the stage clearly and make our way across it”. He adds: “This is how Scripture constitutes the spectacles of faith: it provides the corrective lenses and the mediated light by which to read our world and interpret it rightly.” Do you now see? There is no alternative means of enlightenment for our lives; other paths other than his word will only worsen our condition, send us into more frightful and miserable mazes.\nIt provides the corrective lenses and the mediated light by which to read our world and interpret it rightly\nFriend, if you don’t read your Bible—to put it candidly and lovingly—you’re lost. If that’s true of you, there’s even no point of pretending to be a Christian (Jn8:31). You don’t know where you come from or where you’re going. You don’t even know where you are or what you’re supposed to do there. You don’t realize how little your thoughts are—because they’re only about the little dark corner you’re in—and you don’t realize that your endeavors are worthless—because you only succeed in what doesn’t matter. The people around you are just as lost as you are and they can’t help, for chances are that they’re just trying to make the most out of the experience.\nIt is foolish and proud to spurn the creator’s—the one to establish the created order—own wisdom and insight to embrace other people’s ideas of how we should live our lives other than humbly receiving the light that comes from God. We’ll only realize that everything will only come into proper focus when we accept the light of the world, Christ Jesus, whose face is the bright shining glory of God that enlightens and gives life to our dead souls.\n“In him [the Word] was life and the life was the light of men”\nJohn1:4\n","date":"9 mai 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/i-dont-read-my-bible/","section":"Articles","summary":"This is how Scripture constitutes the spectacles of faith: it provides the corrective lenses and the mediated light by which to read our world and interpret it rightly.","title":"I Don't Read My Bible!","type":"articles"},{"content":"She was really losing her mind. A rich man (a conclusion I came to just by looking at him) was waiting outside for her. He didn’t even have the courtesy to arrange that they meet someplace else, nor did the thought of using discretion ever crossed his mind. He had to show up right in her intimate family space to do what he does best, without a hint of shame.\nSomehow he convinced her to pack her stuff and leave her husband and kids to follow him. How he managed to do that is still beyond us. He wasn’t even nice; He came off as arrogant, brutal, condescending and determined to get his way—to unashamedly break this family apart.\nShe is my neighbor, a stay-at-home mum and she has just decided that she’s had enough with this kind of life. I came to the scene when I was back from work and saw her husband pleading her not to leave him. It broke my heart because usually, we, men, do these stupid things. After having understood what was happening, I went in and asked to talk to her in private which, to my surprise, they agreed to.\nWith a calm but yet strong and unwavering voice I tried to reason her not to make that mistake—especially with that strange guy waiting for her. I opened her eyes to the fact that she has an amazing husband and also to the seriousness of the mistake to which she’d eventually regret for the rest of her life. Listening to myself, I thought I was pretty convincing.\nAfter my speech, she was overwhelmed and started crying. She couldn’t believe that she was actually going to leave her family and I was happy that she was coming to herself. But then, something incomprehensible happened. After about twenty minutes she decided she was just being emotional and had to leave after all. And this time, despite the tears pouring down her husband’s cheeks, she really left.\n• • •\nI don’t dream that often but when I do, my dreams, in most cases, do not make sense; hence the exhaustion when I wake up. But in few cases, like this one, they do. I was still under the shock when I woke up as to how she was managed to change her mind that quick. But after giving it some thought, I realized I wasn’t surprised at all.\nThis apparent “repentance” which is then followed by repenting of repenting is not an uncommon experience—and perhaps the dream was a glance of myself in a mirror.\nOur hearts are capable of the most puzzling emotions. Regret and mourning over an act or attitude can be replaced afterwards by a renewed interest in the very thing that caused us regret. Pain over a regret eventually fades away. It is the impact that it made on you which will determine its lasting value—the greater the impact, the longer it will take you to return to that which caused you regret in the first place.\nHardship has produced an apparent change of the mind of Pharaoh, but as soon as he saw any relief from the harm of plagues, he would go back to “hardening his heart” once again. Once, he really seems to repent of his actions and be sincere in his regret as he says: ‘This time I have sinned, the Lord is in the right, and I and my people are in the wrong’ (Exodus9:27). But the story teaches us that even after the death of his own son, after the mourning was over, when we think he’s mourning as to where his stubbornness has lead his country; we see him drowning with the entire host of the empire’s army in the Red sea.\nHow many phony repentances, like Pharaoh’s, have we made so far to God—or the woman’s in my dream? I realized that true and false repentance share this moment of regret but only the genuine repentant turns his life around. The mistake might be that we , by default, try to appease our conscience and alleviate the guilt instead of loading it until, as John Owen says, it “be thoroughly affected with the guilt of its indwelling corruption, until it is sensible of its wound, and lie in the dust before the Lord.”\nUnless we understand that we’re sinning against the Lord and him only (Ps51:4), trampling underfoot the Son of God, profaning the blood of the covenant by which we’re sanctified and outraging the Spirit of grace (Heb10:29); and unless we load our conscience with that and mourn over that mostly before we mourn over the consequences of our sins, our repentance will be fleeting and short-lived.\nTrue repentance can’t be passive. The plea is thus simple: Don’t waste your guilt!\n","date":"14 mars 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/do-you-mean-it/","section":"Articles","summary":"The greater the impact, the longer it will take you to return to that which caused you regret in the first place.","title":"Do You Mean It?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"14 mars 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/john-owen/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"John Owen","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"14 mars 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/pain/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Pain","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"14 mars 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/regret/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Regret","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"14 mars 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/repentance/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Repentance","type":"tags"},{"content":"So short but yet long enough to make one wonder. So simple but yet intriguing enough to stir up one’s imagination. Any serious reader will find himself asking (many) questions to fully understand the story; for it seems the author carefully chose very few sentences to describe a massive and unprecedented event.\nMy mind was taken right to the scene when I stumbled over this sentence. The sound this story is talking about wasn’t that of a mighty rushing wind. It’s clearly stated it was “like” it. How did it sound like? I’ve heard–and I know you might have as well–sounds with an attached violent force before; but it made no difference in me. Rarely has it stopped me from what I was doing, let alone prompt me to follow its direction. But this one was different.\nThe story goes on to tell us that the sound “filled the entire house”. My mind got really challenged. How can a sound loud enough to alert an entire city “fill” a single small house? I don’t think it was an exaggeration on the author’s part that for the sake of emphasizing the loudness and violence of the sound he used the words “mighty rushing wind”. It was really a ‘mighty’ sound for a multitude really gathered as a result of it–more than 3000 people gathered. What a sound?\nAs to the direction of the wind, we’re told that, contrary to the normal course of things (e.g. east to west), it came down from heaven. The coming and outpouring of the third person of the Trinity was, to say the least, powerful and majestic.\n• • •\nChange is what we all are looking for. We need change in so many aspects of our lives (emotional, relational, moral, financial, physical, mental, career…). If all these aspects need fixing then perhaps I don’t need a myriad of tweaks that do not go to the root of the issue, to the core of my being. I need a ‘new heart’; the kind of heart inhaling the new, fresh and life giving breath of God rather than the stench of death of my indwelling sin, a heart revived by God its maker.\nChange, experienced by those who were in that ‘house’, is what was observed in that community after this event. The fear that paralyzed them changed into unusual boldness to spread the good news, unparalleled love and mercy and generosity followed as it dramatically changed the financial, relational and social understanding of the community–they shared, willingly, their possessions and there were no needy person in the community of believers. I know; it’s hard for us, entrenched in materialism that we are, to understand this movement.\nIt is true also that so many miracles (speaking foreign languages without previous training, healing the sick, raising the dead,…) were part of their experience as they witnessed to the death and resurrection of our Lord, but again, they also experienced, by the power of the same Spirit, inexplicable endurance and patience under persecution. They were strangely full of joy under such hardship and were full of peace and happiness.\nNothing else could explain the phenomenon; no mere human philosophy or therapeutic technique could bring about the bearing of the fruits of the death and resurrection of the Son of God in the lives of the first century church.\nIs the Holy Spirit the only logical explanation of your life—as it was for the apostolic church? Would it change a single thing was the Spirit to relocate to heaven?\nPrayer: You said, dear Father, that we should ‘ask’ and ‘knock’ at your door and so I come and bring to you, as a car driving to the garage of its maker, this weary soul of mine. Wallowing in the mire of sin is the only thing I can do, for no matter how much water of therapy is poured upon me, I end up returning to the old filth. Unless you send your spirit, I am lost and will be lost eternally. O Father you’re calling me to come, not to try harder or do better, but for refreshing times at the well of living water. Breathe on me, breath of God, breathe into my nostrils the very life of my savior…\n“If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” Luke 11:13\n","date":"22 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/do-you-want-to-change/","section":"Articles","summary":"If much need fixing, then perhaps I don\u0026rsquo;t need a myriad of tweaks that do not go to the root of the issue.","title":"Do You Want to Change?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"22 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/holy-spirit/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Holy Spirit","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"22 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/pentecost/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Pentecost","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"22 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/spirit/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Spirit","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"22 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/wind/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Wind","type":"tags"},{"content":"He was driving the company’s car that afternoon and we were heading back home. The heat scorched the countryside and everyone in the car was drowsing for the hour long drive ahead of us. We were all sorely tired after a grueling day and each was plunged in his own mind; I was surrendering to the soothing effect of the smooth jazz playing in the car. We were too comfortable and we knew that there’s a cold shower and a copious meal awaiting each one of us.\nIt wasn’t really something we haven’t seen before because we’ve been driving along that road for months now. It’s just that we, after a whole day spent with them, get to go back to our comfortable lives and so we start feeling the weight they have to carry for their entire lives.\n“They really do live in unbearable poverty, don’t they?” he asked me—it really wasn’t a question, he just wanted me to agree with him. Looking over the window, I couldn’t agree more, but again it’s normal in that remote area. I saw, sitting down in front of a small hut, a mother holding a baby obviously tormented by hunger. The mother couldn’t afford these things we take for granted—clothes, food, a roof… How they could live without the minimum accommodation in this unbearable heat was beyond us.\nHowever, we knew the guy for loving money more than the average person; he passionately talked about it. He was also a born again Christian, so he said—although it was hard for us to believe him for he gave no sign of ‘piety’ whatsoever. With that in mind, I answered his question: “Were you given a choice, would you rather have been born this poor knowing God or be incredibly rich (like our boss) but standing no chance of being exposed to the gospel?”\nHe hesitated. He was honest enough to tell me the question wasn’t that simple to answer. He was more inclined to the option of getting rich to which I quickly retorted: “If you’d rather have riches than God, then you must really not believe in hell…”\nHe thought I was not being realistic and I thought he wasn’t really serious about his Christian beliefs and to him I came off really naïve, hard-nosed and eccentric. Suddenly, it seemed, the sight of extreme poverty was more repelling than hell and all the horror we associate to it; or could it be that he was blinded by his materialism? What I didn’t know is that I was trying to take the speck out of his eyes when there was a log in mine—we really are not that different.\nThis is a universal problem. There’s a wide range of things that we would personally affirm theoretically to be true but which we do not live out. We treat Christian truths the same way we treat mathematical theories—they’re known to be true but, when it comes to the real life, they’re irrelevant. No matter how much interest you might have in science, E=mc2 has no practical value personally; that is in the way I make everyday life decisions.\nAs most of the mathematical theories (I just remembered Pythagoras’s theorem) they’re stored somewhere in our brains, ready to be dug out only when it becomes the subject of a conversation—mostly as a cover to really show up how smart one is. Have you also noticed that they only speaks to the intellectual aspect of a human being?\nUnfortunately this is how we treat Christian truths—located in a storage part of the brain for boring and irrelevant things. Something more alarming is that we do not even notice this and we walk around believing that we believe when in fact we don’t.\nWe say that we believe in God but do not really live as if we’re submitted to a higher authority; as if we will give an account to him. We say that we believe in the next life when we really live as though this is all there is—we do not make decisions in light of eternity. We say we want to go to heaven and spend eternity with God when we can’t even stand few minutes of Bible reading. We say (and sing) that we need God when we live and adopt an attitude suggesting that we don’t really need him and, worse, all that stuff about the blood and the cross of Christ are just dead thoughts for it has never influenced any decisions we ever made.\nAre we—and by that I especially include myself—taking God seriously?\nPaul writes that if resurrection wasn’t real—which is central to his theology—then we of all people are to be pitied (1 Corinthians 15:14-19). For him everything he did and built crumbles, would resurrection be just a legend. But for the most of us, nothing would shake since Christ and his work has never been that foundational in our lives.\nFriend, faith without works is dead. If there are no works accompanying your faith, it is time to take an honest look at your faith and test its authenticity.\nImage credit: Himba Hut - Baron Reznik\n","date":"16 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/are-you-serious/","section":"Articles","summary":"A story of a conversation with an old colleague.","title":"Are You Serious?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"16 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/poverty/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Poverty","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"16 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/seriousness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Seriousness","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/angels/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Angels","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/demons/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Demons","type":"tags"},{"content":"Sailing back home that morning, ordinary that it might have seemed, was an unforgettable experience for me. From a distance, as we were approaching the land, we saw strange shapes floating over the water; but things were still fuzzy and unclear from there and so we easily dismissed the sight as illusion. But the more we got closer to the shore, we couldn’t deny that something was definitely wrong…\nWe were still thinking those were boats but as we drew near we realized they were so many to count, and so small. Canoes were bigger than those things we were seeing. And they were so many. We were all ready to affirm we’ve never seen that many boats (or whatever) afloat in one place. What could it be? Besides, it looked like they were upside down. Who could have done such an odd thing? Maybe they were hippos and could it be safer for us not to come any closer?\nGetting ready to reverse course because of fear, we started hearing sounds. It was noisy out there at the shore. Trying hard to identify what looked like a large crowd gathered at the shore, we thought it was a sound of tumult. But what could have possibly happened? Why the commotion? And most importantly, for the life of us, what is that?\nMustering all the courage we had in us, we drew a bit closer and clear edges started to form on those shapes, and daring a little more, things became crystal clear. We couldn’t believe what laid before our eyes: dead pigs. Dread seized every one of us.\nAfter having found a way to land–far from where we usually land, of course–we quickly ran where the crowd was gathered to find out what happened. It was no easy task because people were still under the shock. Allowing a look back in the water, we could only drop our jaws, widely open our eyes and feel a sudden rush of terror filling us.\nYou see, a great herd of swine of approximately 2,000 in number was floating over the water on the sea of the country of the Gerasenes and the reason was that demons coming from a single man entered them and rushed them, all the way from the mountain side, down the steep and they drowned. The man was in his right mind—something that terrified us even more because the man used to be living in tombs crying out and cutting himself with stones and he was with such violence that no chain could tame him.\nAnd who did that? Who disturbed those demons? By what kind of power? Jesus did that!\nMark 5:1-20\n• • •\nMy natural inclination is to think logically. I like to take facts and not default into mysteries—or superstitions, as some would say. It is more acceptable to think that someone is suffering some kind of psychological or neurological disease, or something of the kind, rather than thinking he’s possessed with demons.\nThis story clearly rejects the idea. It provides unquestionable evidence on the existence—and evil, at the same time—of a dark spiritual evil forces. No psychological power (or disease) could be transmitted to animals like this. The scene came with real (and painful) economic consequences for that community. We can’t deny it; demons are real and they are evil.\nBut that is not the point of the story.\nIt is true that biblical teaching is not explicit (clear, concise) about how to understand the world of demons or satanic powers but that doesn’t mean that the Bible is not sufficient and trustworthy as a guide in this world where such evil is present. It just means that our attention is not to be completely taken away in that dark world, as this story makes the case.\nJesus commissions the delivered man to tell others how great God is and how He had mercy on him. That’s right: It is a story about the greatness of God and of his mercy. We don’t need to worry about these evil unseen spirits as long as we have one who is of more power than them.\nHeaven forbid that the evil and the malefic power of ‘legion’ obscure the glory of the Lord’s power and mercy. Let not fascination with stories of demon-possessed people and the teachings on how to fight and subdue and avoid demons take primacy over the study of an infinitely more interesting God. Let not ‘spiritual warfare’ against unclean spirits makes less attractive the sweeter ‘communion with Christ’. Let not your ‘spiritual awareness’ be in tune to demons’ presence but more in tune to a greater protection in the shadow of the almighty God.\nAllow me to go out on a limb and add this one: Do not tremble at demons but,\n“Tremble, O earth at the presence of the Lord…”\nPsalm 114:7\nImage credit: Just another brick on the shore - Saturated, Grant MacDonald\n","date":"8 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/dont-worry-about-these-demons/","section":"Articles","summary":"I believe in the existence of angels and demons (or spirits, or what have you). Do you?","title":"Don't Worry About These Demons","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/evil-spirits/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Evil Spirits","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/satan/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Satan","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"8 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/spiritual-warfare/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Spiritual Warfare","type":"tags"},{"content":"I magine being offered an opportunity to visit one of the biggest cities in the world. Considering that it’s your first time flying from your small home town (and visiting a big city for that matter), then you’re most probably having great expectations as to the experiences that await you. For this you’re excited.\nLanding in that city comes with a sense of marvel. You’re seeing new things coming in new dimensions altogether enlarging your horizons; and like a fish accustomed with the simplicity and smallness of a brook, you need help to adjust yourself and dive into a new realm of depth and immensity.\nBut unless you have a faithful and trustworthy guide, being new gets you exposed; especially in metropolitan areas known to be filled with greedy and malicious people. But as time goes by, you know better not to be gullible. Time makes you less susceptible to fall for some of the most obvious tricks.\nHowever, we’ve all realized that deception is not exclusive to “fresh meats”. It happens to everyone; even to local and smart people who are supposed to know everything. It just depends on how good the bluffer is—and of course what’s at stake. You, as a first time comer, stand no chance to some of the best swindlers.\nGreat liars are able to bypass your suspicions and doubts and precautions by creating a friendly environment for you to let down your guards. In some of these great movies that we love, they’re even able to breach the most sophisticated security systems. They can trick anyone without them ever noticing it; that’s how good they can be. They are masters. Deception is their field of expertise.\nWhen it comes to dealing with them, wisdom is, in this case, to be as good as deaf (or dead) to them.\nThis is interesting and important to us because we’ve come to visit the domain of the “father of lies”. He is the founder of the business of deception which basically means that all the skills of these great thieves put together do not come nowhere close to his. Moreover, he holds the title of “the prince of this world”.\nDoes it imply that he might be injecting confusion and vicious lies in what looks harmless in our clichés and beliefs systems, and many of our ways of thinking and living our lives? Does it imply that we live in a culture so imbued with those lies that we ended up believing them? Does it mean that you and I might be under his delusions without even knowing it?\n“But what could he possibly want from me?” You might ask. You’re his prey. The great deceiver is “prowling around like a lion seeking someone to devour”. So there’s a lot at stake here. Your life and destiny is at stake.\nFor us to fully understand the matter at hand, a stark picture is drawn in Revelation 20; a picture of a dragon, ‘that ancient serpent’, that must be bound and thrown into a pit. It reads: “shut it and seal it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer…” The imagery here is full of meaning. There’s a beast (representing filth and evil) that must be bound to keep him from deceiving us.\nDo we grasp the magnitude of the implications thereof? Do we understand that the only solution for our world against his lies is to isolate him?\nIt is said that we truly appreciate the value of something when it is taken away. Life is appreciated in the face of death. Light is appreciated in darkness. Truth is priceless when surrounded by lies. But where is truth and reliable guidance to be found in this foggy and hazy world?\nThere’s one whose ‘sum of his word is truth’. He is the voice ‘full of grace and truth’. It isn’t like man’s voice: It has proven to be true from eternity past for it has never lied nor mislead anyone under any circumstances. ‘Behold, he delights in truth in the inward being’ and for those who will listen, they will ‘know the truth and the truth will set them free’ from the alluring voice of the great deceiver that leads to perdition.\nCome and let us heed this voice…\nJesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth and the life….”\nJohn 14:6\nImage credit: City Lake - John Herbert\n","date":"1 février 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/are-we-being-lied-to/","section":"Articles","summary":"It is said that we truly appreciate the value of something when it is taken away. Life is appreciated in the face of death. Light is appreciated in darkness. Truth is priceless when surrounded by lies.","title":"Are We Being Lied To?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"11 janvier 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/burundi/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Burundi","type":"tags"},{"content":"R ape is among other atrocities committed in any war anywhere, but it is unique in its kind. An article on RFI’s website quotes the Burundian human rights minister estimating rape cases around 10,000 in 2015 only (Although the interior ministry denies this). Few are those that are courageous enough to come forward for in addition to shame, they fear for their own lives. As to whether they get justice or not is another question.\nWill the criminals ever be prosecuted? Where will justice come from? Because of the current delicate political situation, so many are making an appeal to the international criminal court (rather than our own Burundian law courts) for many of those acts of pure evil upon the weak, voiceless and helpless citizen. Infuriating is the thought that added to the fact that rapists are getting away with it is the fact that, their impunity is promoting in the community a brutal, criminal and cruel perversity (the words are weak) melted with ethnicism.\nA recent article in the New York Times magazine makes a case of how investigative challenges for rape cases in the U.S. can be enormous. The article describes in detail how complicated, expensive and time consuming these cases can be. Among those challenges are, if you can believe it, ideas about what constitutes ‘real rape’, lack of physical evidence or crime scene for investigation (most cases are reported after a long time and most of them don’t result in serious injuries), the questioning of the victim’s moral state, the difficulty to identify the perpetrator…\nIf challenges are that enormous for the wealthiest country, equipped with seemingly unlimited resources and a qualified personnel, how much more could it be for a poor and heavily corrupted country—a place where there’s no such thing as DNA national database in case there’s physical evidence or police lab for image enhancement in case the aggressor is caught on surveillance camera–where almost all of these allegations are charged against the police and the armed youth members of the ruling party?\nAdded to this, if the crimes committed in this period of unrest in Burundi are ever, we hope, going to be prosecuted, much of the attention is probably going to be devoted to the growing number of murder cases which means that so many these ‘minor’ cases are going to seep through the cracks.\nProspects for the triumph of justice are all the more bleak. If we were to make statistics of the likelihood of justice being served, the above facts will be creating a terrible equation; we are left to despair: The majority of raped women will never get justice.\nStill added to the above facts is, in the best case scenario, if we consider that those rapists (and all other criminals) will be incarcerated, a question begs to be asked: ‘Is really a prison cell doing justice?’ That hardly seems so. A cell doesn’t seem to be the equivalent of the emotional and psychological pain that raped women have to face. After all, the damage is already done. There’s no coming back.\nWhat can we say about those who contract sexual transmitted diseases and/or get pregnant as a result? Shame, mental disorders, probable sexual dysfunction, anxieties, fear, depression, suicide (very frequent)… Prison doesn’t match the life-long emotional consequences to face. Prison is too weak a penalty. It’s just no match.\nHuman justice systems, alas, can only go so far. That’s how limited they are. We cry and yearn for justice. Justice is naturally to be desired, but it is costly. If that kind of (impressive) effort is invested to (only) lock a rapist behind the bars when in fact he deserved more, we better hope of a higher and more effective institution to administer justice rightfully.\nIf there’s no justice in this lifetime for the victims of that horrific act of perversion, then we must believe in a perfect justice to come because otherwise what is the point of this human deep desire for justice—a desire pushing him into the noble effort of building this institution? We await a time when the world will be made right, when He, the creator, will be shown as infinitely superior to the human justice system. His word predicts a day He’ll come back in power to establish his rule.\nHe’ll shine, on that day, as perfect in his judgments and perfect in his verdicts. His righteousness must and will shine for all the world to see. Justice must be served. Justice will be served. Justice will be achieved. He cannot be mocked! He must be glorified.\nIt is good news for us but it is at the same time bad news. The perfect court will revisit every act we have committed in this earthly life. Mere time won’t cancel unpunished sin. The standards for perfect justice are high! It’s the kind of standard that equates lustful thought with adultery (placing them at the same level as rape in the sexual immorality category), anger with murder (Mat5:21-22), unforgiveness and revenge (which we tend to have against our offenders) with a denial of mercy.\nThe good news of the Gospel is that the Son of God bore the weight of eternal punishment which we all deserve and clothes those who believe in him with a perfect righteousness of his own. It is what is called, in judicial terms, amazing grace…Can you believe this?\n“Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” Galatians 5:19-20\n","date":"11 janvier 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/he-cant-be-mocked/","section":"Articles","summary":"‘Is really a prison cell doing justice?’ That hardly seems so. A cell doesn’t seem to be the equivalent of the emotional and psychological pain that raped women have to face…","title":"He Can't Be Mocked!","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"11 janvier 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/justice/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Justice","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"11 janvier 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/categories/politics/","section":"Categories","summary":"","title":"Politics","type":"categories"},{"content":"","date":"11 janvier 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/rape/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Rape","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"11 janvier 2016","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sexual-abuse/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sexual Abuse","type":"tags"},{"content":"I f you were to ask me what the most attractive quality in a person is, I would not think twice; I realized that qualities like joy, love, patience, hard work… are definitely to be pursued by everyone , but one specific quality stood out as all-encompassing — Authenticity.\nAuthentic people are real. Let it be first understood that I’m not referring to those moments when people use lines like ‘I’m just being real’ or ‘I’m just being me’ as a license to do whatever their feelings (distorted sometimes) dictates. That is not what authenticity is. The proof is that we don’t like it when those lines are used to hurt or do bad things to us— because they can be used that way— and certainly we don’t admire them for being authentic.\nBy definition something is authentic when it really is what it claims to be and so, consequently, authentic people are true people, people whose words are just a reflection of who they really are. They’re not false in the sense that they’re not hypocrites.\nWe know something to be authentic when it’s not a copy; i.e. it’s not fake or counterfeit. In this sense, authentic people are not just a product of a particular social convention, they don’t merely subscribe to other people’s ways of life when those values clearly are not true to their character, or their own personality. I don’t mean by this that they cannot be influenced but I do mean to say that when they are, they’re mature and careful enough not to deny what it is that makes them who they are.\nA fish is being real and authentic when it is living a life that is true to its metabolism, i.e. to the way it was created: living in water. When the fish is trying to live on land, it is basically denying its nature and therefore its choices (of inauthenticity) have painful consequences. Likewise, human beings are called to live according to their natural, intellectual, emotional and spiritual metabolism.\nBut what is your true self, really? Who’s to decide how your true self looks like—how it behaves? Is true self something we get to define? However unclear the concept of true self can be, its demonstration is hard to miss, that is, we can really tell when someone is being truly human!\nTo a wolf, as to any other animal in fact, following its natural instincts is its authentic way of life. Although we have a tendency to follow the wolf’s philosophy of life (what looks good is good), we forget that human life is way more complicated than the wolf’s.\nWe are endowed with superior qualities that turn living to obey our impulses into an inauthentic—denying who we are—approach to life. We are rational beings with a will and with, in most cases, a capacity to differentiate between the good and the bad. We know that everything that looks good isn’t automatically good but, alas, because of the deterioration of our values, and being accustomed to the bad to the point it loses its ugliness, we have turned into the most inauthentic beings in the universe.\nTo go a step further in our definition, authenticity can also mean the reproduction with accuracy of something that is original. Something authentic presents the exact same features as its original version. But how, in light of this, are we to understand personal authenticity? How can we achieve authentic existence?\nThe author of our lives, the one who set the purpose for our humanity became flesh and dwelt among us. And in his life in the flesh, he showcased true humanity in all its beauty and glory: a life of love, integrity, peace, righteousness, humility, purity, forgiveness, sacrifice and most of all of Holy Communion with our heavenly father (the quality whereby other qualities find their meaning). He championed each of those qualities and shows, par excellence, what being human truly means.\nA life not following this original model dramatized in the life of Christ is completely disconnected to its primary and original source and by implication, it suffers the consequences of inauthenticity—lack of a sense of joy or fulfillment.\n“I said in my heart in regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts.” Ecclesiastes 3:18\n","date":"29 décembre 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/like-a-beast/","section":"Articles","summary":"Something authentic presents the exact same features as its original version. But how, in light of this, are we to understand personal authenticity?","title":"Like a Beast","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"1 décembre 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/bartimaeus/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Bartimaeus","type":"tags"},{"content":"I t was his usual spot. Everyone in that area knew him for he’s been there since anyone could remember. He had someone to help him occasionally but most of the time he was alone. Life circumstances made it that he had no other choice than being a beggar. You see, he was blind…\nThat alone could have stirred up pity in the hearts of people, but they hardly noticed him. Only when you’re in that position—that of weakness and helplessness— you get to see the frigid, cold emotions we people sometimes have. Some passed by without even allowing a look at him, others would leave him coins, but just a small amount that could hardly buy a thing. But he was, nevertheless, grateful because he could just scrape along on that very little income.\nBasking in the sun every day and facing its scorching heat on that roadside was a challenge but Bartimaeus was used to it. But apart from that he faced other challenges; like hunger, derision and some were taking advantage of his blindness to steal his money…\nBut one day, on a normal casual day in Jericho, he heard the sound of a tumult…\nHe tried to find out what was happening. ‘Why all these people?’ ‘What’s going on?’ ‘Are we in some kind of danger?’ ‘What kind of noise is this?’ You see, he had to find out for there was no way he could just sit there clueless of the happenings! He asked to the nearest neighbor which might have ignored him; as usual. But eventually he found out it was Jesus passing by. A myriad of thoughts hacked their way through his mind; thoughts strangely full of hope.\nHe knew about Jesus and his miracle working power. It was an opportunity to heal, a doorway out of his pain and it looked to him as the crack of the dawn; it looked as if there were pricks of light shining in his utter dark space. The prospect of recovering sight got him enough energy (that he surely didn’t have) to cry out to him. He managed, as a matter of fact, to cry louder than anybody else. He cried: ’Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!’\nPeople were used to see him sitting on the roadside begging, but this time his shrieks were annoying. They tried to persuade him that it was of no avail and that the Master, as any honored guest in a house, didn’t come to be dealing with such dirty people (with no manners) that brought such trivial matters. Some even used strong language trying to stop him.\nHowever, all of these couldn’t get to him. All that they were doing was to thrust him back to darkness. His heart throbbing, his body filled with unusual energy and zeal to leave the darkness; he cried all the more, giving a howl of pity. His voice became increasingly husky as he wailed with pain to the one who could get him out of the misery of blindness.\nHe had to shout; shout to make his distress signal loud enough; shout as loud as he possibly could for Him who carried his freedom and healing in his very hands.\nFortuitously, Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart. Get up; he’s calling you.” And throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. And Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” And the blind man said to him, “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.” And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way.\n• • •\nL et that sink in. This six verses story is usually read in a hurry, maybe because we know it so well. But if only we’d stop for a while and feel the dynamics, only then should we see that we’re not much different from this blind man.\nAt the end of the day, blindness isn’t limited to our physical eyes and, added, our unguided and purposeless ways of life of going back and forth endlessly, bumping into the same obstacles again and again make us look more like the blind man.\nCould Bartimaeus just shake off blindness out of his life? No! So in the same way it’s nonsensical—let alone impossible— to produce light and direction for our lives with nothing other than our own efforts.\nWhat, in light of this, can we do other than crying out for his mercy?\nAnd just as Bartimaeus cried out of his yearning for sight, we may cry out of our yearning for light, meaning, hope, purpose and guidance. Shall we?\n\u0026ldquo;As the deer pants for flowing streams,\nSo pants my soul four you, O God.”\nPsalm 42:1\n*Image credit: Jesus healing the blind man \u0026ndash; Lawrence OP\n","date":"1 décembre 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/please-dont-pass-me-by/","section":"Articles","summary":"Our unguided and purposeless ways of life of going back and forth endlessly, bumping into the same obstacles again and again make us look more like the blind man.","title":"Please Don't Pass Me By","type":"articles"},{"content":"W hat is it that transforms the culmination of the joy in my soul into melody? What is it that gives the expression of gladness inside of me a musical turn?\nFor many of us, there will be a feeling; a growing itch to channel out our joy into moves, and that flow and rush of energy, will find the proper outlet through a jovial beat.\nAlthough music can have many colors (grief, love, worship, despair…), it is, however, the best means of expressing joy that I can think of. The high intensity of that joy and the rhythm demands more than a casual humming of a song; it will definitely stretch the vocal cords into an outburst sound of joy.\nCould it be that we were made that way for a deeper purpose? Could it be that there is a reason behind the way we’re (almost) all wired?\nIt’s not, I contend, a coincidence. We’re made after the image and likeness of a God whose explosion of joy and happiness causes him to sing…\n“What I hear when I hear the singing of God is the crash of the Niagara Falls and the boom of that water hitting the bottom and the spray coming out mingled together with the sound of a quiet little mountain mossy stream….I hear the blast of mount St. Helen; 40 miles away, mingled with the purr of a kitten, I hear the power of an east-coast Hurricane mingled together with the almost inaudible puff of snow in the night wood and I hear the roar of the burning of the Sun; 860,000 miles thick; 1.3million times bigger than the earth and it is all fire; a million degrees centigrade on the cooler surface of the corona. But I hear this unimaginable roar mingled with the tender, warm crackling of logs in the living room on a cozy winter’s night.\u0026quot;\nJohn Piper, Pleasures of God .\nWhat’s that sound that your imagination plays in your mind? Can you hear that sound?\nTo imagine a God “rejoicing with gladness”; a God who will “exult over us with loud singing” (Zephaniah3:17) is for the moment, a fanciful thought. What our eyes has never seen—the gladness of God—and what our ears has never heard—the singing voice of God—is what He has in store for those who trusted him.\nIt’ll surely be the ultimate solo but until then, we can only imagine…\nImage credit: Ice and Snow - Saturated, Sharon Drummond\n","date":"10 octobre 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/the-ultimate-solo/","section":"Articles","summary":"What is it that transforms the culmination of the joy in my soul into melody? What is it that gives the expression of gladness inside of me a musical turn?","title":"The Ultimate Solo","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"23 septembre 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/genuineness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Genuineness","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"23 septembre 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/hypocrisy/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Hypocrisy","type":"tags"},{"content":"I t is quite a painful moment when you realize that you’re really not what you thought you were and that you’ve been living a lie all along. It might have happened to you when tested on a subject that you thought you were really good at; you failed and it dawned on you that you are not what you thought, after all.\nIn my opinion, self-deception is most tragic when it is in relation with your identity. If we ask ourselves what really defines us, the answer we give to that question is what we perceive ourselves to be and it undergirds our perspectives and most importantly, our actions, whether we are aware of it or not.\nFor instance, talking with clarity and confidence at a job interview sends out a good impression; one that you know what you’re talking about and that you might be the right person for the job. But that confidence comes from your own perception of what you have, i.e. in this case, the knowledge that you are equipped for the job. That is a good thing—unless you’re proven wrong and when it comes down to that, your confidence is shaken (If you are honest with yourself).\nThere is, however, a situation that matters infinitely more. I used the word ‘self-deception’ because it happens often that we pat ourselves on the back and delude ourselves even when it comes to the most important matters in life—as being a Christian for example. Most of us define ourselves to be Christians. But are we?\nThe Bible is full of examples of people who were not ‘Christian’ but who did the most ‘Christian’ things you will probably be able to do:\nPharaoh said the “sinner’s prayer” twice: Ex9:27, 10:16. Saul prophesied for a whole day (Have you?): 1Samuel19:24. Ahab went through an apparently traumatic experience of repentance to the point of tearing his clothes and putting on sackcloth (Have you?): 1Kings21:27. Some fasted for days listening to Jesus (Do you love God’s words this way?); Nebuchadnezzar had incredible dreams from God of real events impacting the future of nations (Have you lately?): Daniel2. Judas Iscariot healed the sick and chased out demons (Have you?):Mat10:5-8. Pharisees had mastered the scriptures; Others expressed exuberant praise and worship to Jesus (I assume without the help of rock bands or fancy light and sound systems in our modern churches), making a huge commotion crying out ‘Hosanna…’—they were shouting ‘crucify Him’ five days later. If you’re familiar with these biblical characters, you know they were rejected by God and so if we ever base our confidence in outward actions no matter how amazing or miraculous they might appear, then we might be building on sand.\nIf it is so, and that nothing of our Christian experience does not match what is listed above in intensity, then why do we keep basing our faith in the form and not the substance? What do we remain with when we take off this form of Christianity?\nThis is an appeal for us to examine ourselves, so that we won’t congratulate and delude ourselves into thinking we are something we’re really not; being puffed up in self-deception to our shame and our perdition when the day comes when the truth is laid out before us.\n‘What then does it really mean to be a Christian?’ you might ask. That, dear brethren, is the real question!\n“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” Matthew 7:21\nImage credit: There is and There is not \u0026ndash; Saturated, Hartwig HKD\n","date":"23 septembre 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/take-care-lest-you-be-deceived/","section":"Articles","summary":"It is quite a painful moment when you realize that you’re really not what you thought you were and that you’ve been living a lie all along","title":"Take Care Lest You Be Deceived","type":"articles"},{"content":"S o many devastating events happened in Burundi in the recent past. But the major ones and the most catastrophic took place, oddly enough, on Sundays. The central market of the city, which was the biggest of the country caught fire on a Sunday, it was reduced to ashes. Torrential rains killing so many people in the North of the Capital City as well as the South of the country, massive killings…just to name a few; all took place on Sundays. These events would have happened on any given day but the fact that they all happened on a Sunday could hardly go unnoticed. What are the odds of that happening?\nWe read that the nation whose God is the Lord is going to experience unprecedented showers of blessings and prosperity. But, so far, it hasn’t happened for us and we’re only left wondering why. How and where did we fail to God’s favor?\nNow the majority of Burundians (90% of the population, so they say) are Christians and that means that crowds of people flock into their respective churches on every Sunday on the basis of the belief that Sunday is the Lord’s Day: a day of worship. But there has been too many coincidences of bad events on Sundays that even unbelievers are subconsciously pressing with this question: ‘Is God really that angry with us, Burundians, that he’d allow the unravelling of those catastrophes multiple times on a “Lord’s day”?’\nWhat has our Sunday worship songs done for us lately? We wonder! What good did all the singing and all the prophesying bring to us? And what about and all the dancing for God that goes on throughout the whole land on any typical Sunday? With all these revival meetings and all those crusades going on, we ask: ‘Doesn’t it please God at all?’ And all these disasters happening, on Sundays… for crying out loud!\nNot in any way picking up from the Burundian situation, it seems to me that Sunday, no matter which country we’re in, isn’t really God’s favorite day, in fact, I’d assume that God hates Sunday.\nGod, at times, confronted his people, the Israelites, regarding their worship services and I think that regardless of our location (country), we should all be wise to listen because in my opinion; this applies to every one of us.\nHe says that ‘his soul hates’ our singing and gatherings, and that ‘they’ve become a burden to him’. He’s just ‘weary of bearing them’. (Isaiah1:14)\nWhy wouldn’t he delight in our singing? Why wouldn’t he receive our prayers and offerings but instead consider it as ‘abominations’? (Isaiah1:13)\nWhy isn’t God pleased with our assemblies?\nIsn’t it what he has commanded us— that we celebrate the Lord’s Day? But instead we get rejection: “…who has required of you this trampling of my courts?”(Isaiah1:12)\nGod, as a loving father, loves those who love him, and He loves those who come to him and He heals the brokenhearted. However, we should do well to remember that he isn’t looking for the loud and long prayer performances. God is God. Love and delight in Him on the one hand and fear and reverence on the other hand ought to characterize our attitudes when coming to him. I assure you dear friends, He’s not in for the worship charades and all the trivialities that we’ve prepared on Sundays.\nDo our sacrifices mean nothing to him?\nOur sacrifices, no matter how costly they were, aren’t what He’s after. The fat rams (or the big tithes), the lavish and empty religious activities are what He despises. He’s the one to give it to us in the first place, for the earth and everything in it is the Lord’s.\nHe desires the great sacrifices; ourselves. When we come to him, He yearns for our absolute surrender to Him.\nObedience is better than sacrifice! Thus says his Word. The only thing that matter at the end of the day is that we obey him for “rebellion is as the sin of divination” (1samuel15:22).\nI think it’s about time that we take away ‘the noise of our songs and the melody of our harps’ (Amos5:23) and come with honest, transparent and humble hearts; hearts broken before the Lord on Sundays… Thirsty hearts for his word saying: ‘Speak O Lord, for your servants hears.’ Hearts willing to trust him and believe and love him wholly during the week. Hearts that are tired of singing words that aren’t true in their everyday life and hearts that are ready to suffer whatever it takes to love and obey him.\nI’d clarify that I’m not saying that Burundians are being punished by getting poverty and chaos because of our sins instead of wealth and stability. I believe that God does whatever He wills. He decides to prosper the wicked for a moment while the righteous is crying and none can question him. My aim is for us to put off self-righteousness and hypocrisy and humble ourselves before God, and repent.\nI’d like to close this post by reminding you that God abounds with steadfast love and faithfulness. He’s endured you and me! He’s ready to receive your sins, though they’re scarlet and “red as crimson” (Isaiah1:18).\n\u0026ldquo;The Lord, The Lord, a God merciful and gracious…\u0026rdquo; Exodus 34:6\nImage credit: St Mary \u0026amp; All Saints, Dunsfold, Surrey - Paula Bailey - Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0\n","date":"16 juillet 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/god-hates-sundays/","section":"Articles","summary":"These events would have happened on any given day but the fact that they all happened on a Sunday could hardly go unnoticed. What are the odds of that happening?","title":"God Hates Sundays","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"16 juillet 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sunday/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sunday","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"16 juillet 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/worship/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Worship","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"15 juillet 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/sanctification/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Sanctification","type":"tags"},{"content":"S he has been calling me. ‘Come,’ she said, ‘let’s take our fill of love till morning.’ She is the forbidden woman, luring me with her smooth speech like oil; her lips dripping with honey, pouring on me a stream of empty promises; a poisoned chalice which in the end was bitter as wormwood. I believed her lie and the end wasn’t pretty.\nBut it’s not a woman I’m talking about, lest I be misunderstood. I’m talking about a sworn enemy who is at the same time, sometimes, a [false] friend I want to cuddle with… It’s complicated.\nAt time I’m aware of the danger of its—yes, it! —proximity, but somehow I find myself playing with it, and like any cunning serpent, it ends up biting.\nThe problem isn’t that I tasted of the forbidden fruit once. It isn’t that I was deluded once. But the problem is that I keep on believing in these lies. In fact, I find myself selling the precious things I own to purchase that very lie. ‘Like a wild donkey wondering alone, I’ve hired for myself lovers.’\nI tread the living fountain for a broken cistern that cannot hold water on a regular basis and I can’t help giving away my delicacies for a cheap, comforting lie. What is it that makes me act that way? What is it that makes me rush right into a snare like a bird?\n“I do not understand my actions, for I do not do the good I want but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing.”\nI thought of eradicating that thing that kept pulling me down that blind alley by putting some restrictions and setting up some rules to stop me from sliding down that road. But, gritting my teeth into not doing something with only sheer will isn’t the solution.\nThe more I try to fight it, the more I realize that I’m unable to overpower it. There are times I get an apparent victory but then after that, few steps ahead, there’s a deluge of flaming darts that tears me to shreds.\nO, wretched man that I am! How will I get these shackles off and walk in freedom? Who will free me from this evil that, strangely enough, is inside of me—it’s right here, inside of me.\nWhen I looked inside me, I found that it has been so entrenched within me that I lost the hope that it will ever get untangled. It seems to me that the more I try to unsnarl it, the more I find that the tangle patterns are so complex. The jumble has been wreaking havoc within me, it’s stench of death strangling me but also giving me an intense yearn for a clean and pure breath of grace.\nI want to live, to move, to breathe, free from the sin that ‘so entangles me so quickly.’ Even though I know my corruption will still set up limitations, I thank God that I have that hope, me, a worm that was shown grace to be called for a divine purity.\nAdded to that, He has come to free us from the ‘low-lying black cloud’ by giving us the Spirit of life that is in Him which, like a ‘strong wind, has magnificently cleared the air, freeing me from a fated lifetime of brutal tyranny at the hands of sin and death.’\nThe evil dilemma has been solved, and I’m not mourning like a hopeless man, torn apart between one way and another. But I’ll trust and look unto him through the life of whom God looks to me with grace and favor and who set it right once for all that I might walk in newness of life. In his victory over sin and death, I stand\nFurther Readings: Romans 7:15-8:11, Ezekiel 36, Jeremiah 2:13, Proverbs 5\nImage credit: Caught up in the shadow of the past - Saturated, Sara\n","date":"15 juillet 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/wretched-man-that-i-am/","section":"Articles","summary":"“I do not understand my actions, for I do not do the good I want but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing.”","title":"Wretched Man That I Am","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"29 avril 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/elections/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Elections","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"29 avril 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/fear/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Fear","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"29 avril 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/terror/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Terror","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"29 avril 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/war/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"War","type":"tags"},{"content":"I t is election-madness time in Burundi. It’s not only that political opponents spend their time hurling accusations at each other in awful and audacious harsh tones, or that the president’s recent speech officially confirming his candidacy to the next elections in spite of the constitution and the Arusha agreements all forbidding him to do so. It is not that the raging political debates, mostly protesting the president’s candidacy, for the past few months, ignited a heated, violent and massive protest in the capital city or that everything in our current situation (the shutting down of some radio stations and, now, social media) has gone way beyond a war of words and is fueling the fire of violence coming in the form of riots …It is beyond that. Under all of that lies a beast that we, Burundians, know very well and are afraid to awake.\nIn a country that is barely starting to recover from the civil war that ended just only ten years ago, I have to say that everybody is afraid. Even those that do not look like they are afraid are really acting to prevent what they fear might happen if they don’t act. We hear a lot of rumors of war and terror reigns right now in every part of the country because, let’s face it, all these events seem to culminate in yet another civil war. For many among us, those rumors awake some of the painful memories that were just starting to heal and for others, these heated confrontations (sometimes taking an ethnic turn) are reviving the worst demons that all of us hoped were tamed.\nMany, out of fear, have fled the country, feeling sorry that the beast was awakened and is just only getting ready to unleash its deadly and poisonous power among those who stayed. Everybody’s question is this: ‘Where is our help coming from?’ How can I deal with this fear that everyone is dealing with? Where can I, at least, find the comfort or courage needed to keep me going?\nWe do have a God.\n“Stop right there! Those who died years ago also ‘had a God’,” you might refute my first argument. I’m not dealing with death here, but with fear. The very first battle we have to fight is that of silencing the voices of fear and we can only do that by finding solace in the fact that we have a God, and that we’re his people—those who believe and trust in him of course. There are faithful believers in the biblical times who died ‘having a God’ but one thing is sure, they didn’t die in fear; and that changes everything.\nEven if it comes down to it (God forbid), war isn’t a strange event within the pages of the Bible; in fact, God sometimes led his people right into it just as, other times, he led them to flee from it. At times He miraculously fought some of their battles by himself while his people were watching and still other times, he engaged his people into fighting. He promises sure death—this might churn you up— for his faithful followers (John15:20). Whatever the case— let it be taking action or standing still or fleeing—He calls his people never to fear, for He is their God (Ps46:10, Ex14:13,Joshua1:9).\nThe fact that He is God answers and removes all our reasons to fear. When you have peace with him, when death occurs, you know it will just get better; meeting him will be your gain and your greatest joy (Phil1:21). If it doesn’t, whatever the aftermath, you find comfort in the knowledge that He is in control and however things turn out, it will lead into more joy and more good(Hab3:17-18, Rom8:28).\nSo, what am I really saying? I’m not saying that we shouldn’t fear—it’d be nonsensical to tell you not to have an emotion! What I’m saying is that we have to fight it and never to allow it to take the wheel for fear is lack of faith in his presence (Mark4:40) and at times God has shown great displeasure over it (Numbers13-14). How do you fight it? By kindling your faith in reminding yourself of his promises of protection and care and presence and I must tell you, they abound!\nImage credit: RIOT - Seven Resist \u0026ndash; Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.\n","date":"29 avril 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/when-elections-go-wrong/","section":"Articles","summary":"We hear a lot of rumors of war and terror reigns right now in every part of the country as all these events seem to culminate in yet another civil war","title":"When Elections Go Wrong","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"9 avril 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/dreams/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Dreams","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"9 avril 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/jonathan-edwards/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Jonathan Edwards","type":"tags"},{"content":"Y ou know how sometimes we have to go to the bathroom in the middle of the night? Well, I’m sure that when that happens, we rush there—because we must— and come back quickly to the warm and comfortable bed. We don’t want, by any means, that snugness to be interrupted by the cold breeze of the night; and so we hurry in all that we do.\nBut other times, we wake up and find our way to the bathroom—although we can’t really remember how we got there. We are in a state when we can’t draw the line between consciousness and unconsciousness, when we’re asleep but not quite. You still feel the cold contact between your feet and the floor and still hear those sounds but it’s as if they are not loud enough to awake your quiet and dull brain.\nYou are, in a sense, like a modern plane in the autopilot mode—you know what you have to do, when you have to do it, where you have to go and the way you have to move while going there.\nThat day, I spent the night in a less fancy house. What I mean is that the room was dark and instead of a regular toilet (I’m really sorry for bringing this up) they had a pit, which is perfectly normal on that side of the country—my African friends understand.\nIt’s literally a (very deep) pit with few pieces of wood on top of it for the user to stand on—you can imply by this the absence of flushing system. They are usually safe except when you’re sleep walking; like I did, that night. Luckily for me, my consciousness came back to me just before I make the fatal step into the… I had just a second to open my eyes and realize where I was heading.\n• • •\nFriends, this was a dream. None of this was really happening and I think you can understand the palpitations I had when I woke up because of the ghastly time I just had—it can also be funny when you’re hearing this narrative but, trust me, not when you’re experiencing it.\nNormally, after such a nightmare, life goes on, and I forget it. But this dream was peculiar because it did remind me of Jonathan Edwards’ sermon: “Sinners in the hands of an angry God” from Deut32:35 “…their foot shall slide in due time”. In that sermon, what he did is to paint as best as he could his impression of hell from the scriptures.\nIt is terrifying.\nHe describes the sinner as being “always ready for destruction; as one that stands or walks in slippery places is always exposed to fall” and the only thing left for them to fall is for “God’s appointed time” to come.\nI insist that the state of slumber is upon all those who do not know God for they don’t realize where they’re heading and that God, out of his supreme patience, holds them up on the edge of a bottomless pit, “much in the same way as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect, over the fire” —this might be the reason why the Bible says that when we believe, a veil is removed and light shines in our hearts (2cor3:16).\nThese aren’t just meditations of religious fanatics who are out of touch with reality. Besides, you might argue, a loving God cannot do that. This post won’t deal with proving the coherence in the divine justice with the divine love, but suffice to tell you that it is true that hell is real.\nDwell on the fact that, in the Bible, Jesus preached about hell more than everybody else…combined. Be careful of his choice of words to portray hell—which do not, by any means, soften the horror—: “weeping and gnashing of teeth”(Luke13:28), “their worm does not die”(Mark9:48), “outer darkness”(Mat25:30), “unquenchable fire”(Mark9:43), “eternal punishment” (Mat25:46), … My purpose in this post is not to demonstrate (or argue on) the reality of hell but to let you dwell on Christ’s teaching—the truth, i.e. the one who never lied— and ponder for a moment on how Jesus thought we should think about hell.\nThere is still time to wake up from the comforts of the world, which blind and hypnotize the most of us to the reality. “What if it’s not real?” you might ask. I suggest you don’t risk your life in eternal torments by waiting to find out…\n\u0026ldquo;And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy soul and body in hell.\u0026rdquo; Matthew 10:26\nImage credit: Sleep - Hans Van Den Berg. Licensed under CC BY 2.0.\n","date":"9 avril 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/slumber/","section":"Articles","summary":"He is described as always ready for destruction; as one that stands or walks in slippery places and always exposed to fall","title":"Slumber","type":"articles"},{"content":"S ometimes the things that Jesus said are jarring and it’s difficult to make sense out of it. Today we’re going to take a close look on Luke 11:33-36. He says that ‘your eye is a lamp of your body. When your eye is healthy, your whole body is full of light, but when it is bad, your body is full of darkness.’ (vs34) What does he mean by that?\nNow, my default move — that’s if the text is found in the gospels— is to try and find the same text in other gospels and see if it’s clearer elsewhere. Matthew 6:22 renders the text almost exactly the way Luke does but Matthew5:14-16 records a close parallel and it’s worth reading: ‘You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket… Let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your father who is in heaven.’\nOne thing that is obvious is that in these two passages, something is giving out light in the midst of darkness and Jesus adds, in the second passage, that this light is going to change the way you act, the way you do things —in a good way— and when other people see you, glory is going to the Father. So many times the Bible gives the analogy of light and darkness (e.g. Phil2:14-15, Eph5:8-11…) referring to Christians in the midst of a dark (twisted, crooked, distorted, perverted) world. The world is lost, purposeless and everything in it is vanity and striving after the wind and that’s why darkness is the perfect analogy here. But when it comes to the Christians, we do have a purpose, we know our reason to be, we know where we’re going and, in fact, we do have a guide and helper along the way.\nBeing in the light, as Jesus suggests, is going to make us different because we move as knowing where we’re going. Our actions are going to change to the amazement of those in the darkness and that’s why Jesus says that a lamp that is lighted can’t be put under a basket, that is, where no one sees. It’s impossible that you have light and at the same time that light be invisible to those who are in darkness. By that we understand his plea: ’Let your light shine before others…’\nIf we go back to our text, Jesus says that the eye is the lamp of the body, in other words it is the part that is going to be lighted. From what’s said above, we can understand that once we’re enlightened we are given purpose and direction. That is to say that Jesus isn’t talking about physical eyes here. He’s talking about our spiritual eyes which directly affects our perspective, that is, our view of things —hence the use of the eye as analogy— our purpose and direction in life. We can say that Jesus said that if your perspective is darkened, that is, according to the world; then your whole being is going to move in that direction. But, on the other hand, if it’s enlightened —that is, healthy, in his analogy—then we know our whole body is full of light; meaning that our whole being will go in that direction.\nMatthew Henry’s paraphrase reads: ‘If our leading principles be wrong, our judgments and practice must become more so.’\nWe need to remember the amazing assertion:’ I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life’ (John8:12). It’s not as if the source of light is inside of us but Jesus himself is the light, and as light brings back clarity, vision, direction and order so does Jesus in our life. Whoever has him, he has ‘the light of life.’\nIf we move to the heart of his message in this passage, Jesus is teaching that just as the burning light can’t be hidden, so is everyone whose eyes are healthy, whose vision is clear and whose leading principles are good, right and true(Ephesians5:8). ‘What fellowship has light with darkness?’(2cor6:14) asks Paul, referring to believers and unbelievers. When your body is full of light; it’s going to be wholly bright as when a lamp with its rays gives you light.\nAs there’s a difference between a lighted candle and one that isn’t, so there must be a difference between us and if our works are like theirs, we should be doubting if we ever were enlightened because ‘if we say we have fellowship with him and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth’ (1John1:6). It doesn’t really matter what we profess, by this we may test whether our professions are true.\n‘What is darkness and how may I see it in my life?’ you might ask. I’d simply answer that it’s manifested in every action that doesn’t reflect him. If your plans, your motives, your goals, your vision, your purpose in life and actions aren’t reflecting or leading to him, chances are that you’re in the dark.\nMay we heed Jesus’ caution: ‘Therefore, be careful lest the light in you be darkness?’(Luke11:35)\nLord help us.\n","date":"12 mars 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/the-lamp-of-your-body/","section":"Articles","summary":"It’s impossible that you have light and at the same time that light be invisible to those who are in darkness","title":"The Lamp of Your Body","type":"articles"},{"content":"J. I. Packer is among the few people that are still alive that I turn to for wisdom. He has a legendary theological precision and discernment and an unrivaled skill for clarity in his writings. Honestly, I get a feeling that I have become wise when I read his books and fortunately, he warns about those people—me, in this case— who think they know God just because they know a good deal about Him (being a habitual reader of Scriptures and theology books).\nPacker writes:\nOur friends tell us how much they value our contribution, and this spurs us to further explorations of God’s truth, so that we may be equal to the demands made upon us. All very fine—yet interest in theology, and knowledge about God, and the capacity to think clearly and talk well on Christian themes, is not at all the same thing as knowing him.\nSo, how do we know if we really know God since being fluent in biblical jargon isn’t a sign of true knowledge of God?\nPacker distinguishes many signs of true and real knowledge of God and among those, here is one thought:\nPeople who know their God are before anything else people who pray, and the first point where their zeal and energy for God’s glory come to expression is in their prayers. In Daniel 9 we read how, when the prophet “understood from the Scriptures” that the foretold time of Israel’s captivity was drawing to an end, and when at the same time he realized that the nation’s sin was still such as to provoke God to judgment rather than mercy, he set himself to seek God “ in prayer and petition, in fasting, and in sackcloth and ashes”, and prayed for the restoring of Jerusalem with a vehemence and passion and agony of spirit to which most of us are completely strangers. Yet the invariable fruit of true knowledge of God is energy to pray for God’s cause—energy, indeed, which can only find an outlet and a relief of inner tension when channeled into such prayer—and the more knowledge, the more energy! By this we may test ourselves.\nI’d highly recommend you the (best-seller) book for an extensive answer on the matter.\nImage credit: Vanishing Library - Miguel M.Almeida.Licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0.\n","date":"30 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/do-you-know-god/","section":"Articles","summary":"Interest in theology, and knowledge about God, and the capacity to think clearly and talk well on Christian themes, is not at all the same thing as knowing him.”","title":"Do You Know God?","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"30 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/j.i.-packer/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"J.I. Packer","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"30 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/knowing-god/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Knowing God","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"23 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/design/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Design","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"23 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/disabilities/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Disabilities","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"23 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/george-herbert/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"George Herbert","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"23 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/rest/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Rest","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"23 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/the-pulley/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"The Pulley","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"23 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/weakness/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Weakness","type":"tags"},{"content":" The bows of the mighty are broken but those who stumbled are girded with strength. Hannah - 1 Samuel 2:4\nI’m frustrated by my weaknesses just like everybody else—I suppose. We don’t like people to look at our weaknesses, let alone analyze or talk about them. They’re like thorns in the flesh, things we’d like to hide, the objects of our constant shame, the hurdles ever standing in our way and if we could; we’d suppress them. For those of us who use Photoshop, we wish there was a tool we could use in real life that functions just like it. It’s (almost) unbelievable and almost too good to be true. It’s a world where you’re totally in control, where you have the ability to erase what you’d like to hide, crop out the unnecessary, resize, adjust and erase the blemishes, bring out the beauty and the ‘perfect’ as it seems good to you.\nBut life doesn’t offer one of those tools. You have to live with those weaknesses. You have to accept those glitches in your system, even though you hate them. Those things that you’re constantly aware of; those dark areas that make you short of perfection. You are ever restrained by those weaknesses; you’re set into a box and you feel like they’re fences all around you, obstructing your way to freedom.\nThey make things harder, the sweat on your brow is caused by them and unfortunately whatever your endeavors are, your reach (perfection) always exceeds your grasp. Let it be a natural disability, let it be an undesirable character that always clings to you, let it be a tough situation, let it be anything else; we’re weak.\nBut God, the great artist, has not mistakenly left these weaknesses around. The dark spots were painted purposefully and carefully and they ultimately contribute to the quality and the beauty of the painting. Our Lord, the great designer and the great architect, has not planned a single pointless area— there’s a kind of mess and dirt that sets itself up in any construction site and it doesn’t mean that it’s purposeless. The great director has orchestrated series of events—hopeless situations, events of despair and pain included. But the screenplay was gracefully written in his wisdom; all these scenes were thoughtfully chosen for there’s no otiose lines in his play and God knows they’re not superfluous.\n‘The pulley’ ; one of the famous poems by George Herbert, gives us an insight into God’s merciful dealings with us. God—in the poem— pours on man riches, beauty, wisdom, honor and pleasure but he intentionally withholds his rest in order that “weariness may toss him to His breast”. These weaknesses—especially those that won’t go away— are always pulling us down to the ground to our knees, in a position of prayer and trust and leaning on God. Those weaknesses glorify the creator in that he’s glorified as the helper and magnified in our eyes as the one who lifts the needy from the ash heap, as our supreme helper, and as the lifter of our heads.\nThese weaknesses come to open our eyes to our helplessness, blindness, our limits and constraints, our state of need for assistance… God will be the crutches when you need to walk, your lamp in utter darkness, your eyes because of your blindness, your counselor and helper when you don’t know which way to go…\nThere is something humbling when you realize that true blessedness is in your weakness. One of the first things Christ said, as a matter of fact, is that the weak (the poor in Spirit, those who mourn, the meek, the persecuted, the hungry and thirsty) are those who’re really blessed for God opposes the proud (those who think they don’t need God, those who think they can make it by themselves, those who believe in themselves…) but he gives grace to the humble. (Jas4:6)\nGod knows of our prideful condition, but in his divine pedagogy; He breaks both the arrows and bows of the mighty, He brings down the mighty from his horse, He destroys his fortress and raises Himself as the mighty fortress and the place of refuge for the weak and the stumbling which he—after that—clothes with strength; that is—note this— His strength.\n\u0026ldquo;Therefore I will boast all the more in my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me\u0026rdquo; 2 Corinthians 12:9\n","date":"23 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/weakness-is-the-way/","section":"Articles","summary":"Unfortunately, whatever your endeavors, your reach (prefection) always exceeds your grasp.","title":"Weakness Is the Way","type":"articles"},{"content":"“Can’t stop thinking about her”. “She’s incredibly beautiful.” “She’s all I got and all I need.” “His charm is breathtaking.” “Spending time with him is my moment of ecstasy.” “I can’t imagine life without him.” “Thinking about her is a pure delight.” “He’s handsome, funny and caring.” “He’s the one!”…\nThe list of things lovers say about each other is endless. The spiritually minded among us would say things like: “She is my Proverbs31 woman”. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, just listen to those love songs being played every day on the radio and you’ll hear things people say when they’re ‘in love’. I’m not against this at all; I’m just amazed at how passionate we are about this.\nI was thinking about how less people express their feelings about God with the same amount of energy and passion. In fact, I can’t remember the last time I heard someone telling me about the love he has for God, burning inside him. If everyone says that they love God, and never express it passionately in word or action then there might be inconsistencies in this; we might not only deceive our audience, but also ourselves.\n“How do I love God?” You might ask. Complicated answers have no appeal in here. This, as the love expressed toward a person, naturally flows from within. When you love God, you love his company; you love spending time with him in prayer. You love thinking about him, his character and deeds. You love to listen to his voice from his holy Word. You love to study him and love finding out what pleases him. If you love him, self-sacrifice for him will follow. You’ll enjoy telling your friends and family about him. You will give him—willingly and joyfully— the most precious things you have: time, resources… It’ll prove not to be enough and so you’ll give him everything: your life; which won’t do either—but that’s alright because that’s all you have.\n“Why love him?” Because he first loved you and displayed unfailing and extravagant love towards you. He gave his most valuable possession: his Son! I wouldn’t finish if I start talking about his love; because it ‘surpasses all knowledge’ (Eph3:19).\n“Can’t I just keep the love I have for God down to myself? You know… Keep it cool?” It’s interesting to find that we get that passionate about people when we’re ‘in love’ and not get passionate at all about God. Jesus said something about this: “Whoever loves father or mother more than me isn’t worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.”(Mat10:37).\nI’d like to close this short post by reminding you that “if anyone has no love for the Lord (Jesus-Christ), let him be accursed…” (1 cor16:22) and that “you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment.’ (Mat22:37-38)\nWon’t you love on God today?\nImage credit: Love your neighbor as yourself (Matthew 22:37-39) - JohnNineTwentyFive. Licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0/ Slightly Modified.\n","date":"16 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/love-god/","section":"Articles","summary":"I was thinking about how less people express their feelings about God with the same amount of energy and passion","title":"Love God","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"10 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/alert/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Alert","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"10 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/soldier/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Soldier","type":"tags"},{"content":"Thanks to my part time job, I got to take a closer look on the life of a real soldier (not the kind of soldier that comes from a country that is at peace and who basically has never fought battles in his life; but the soldier that has been fighting for quite some time). I got to listen to a few of their officers (and noncommissioned officers and few very simple warriors) speaking of their actual situation, their everyday life, their war strategies, their requests and few of the challenges that they face every day.\nThey’re people who are well organized and who follow orders to the letter. The matter of security is dealt with very seriously: from the uniforms they wear to those things they setup in the red zone and where they rest—they always think about the bullet flying in the air that can be fatal. And the thing I noticed and which got my attention is the way they’re constantly alert! There’s not a single minute that there aren’t men doing surveillance at the borders of their perimeter.\nWhile considering the things that I saw in that place, my mind was spinning looking for a verse or a metaphor to get a lesson from this—and they abounded. It was interesting to hear Paul compare the Christian life to the soldier’s. He tells us to share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus (2Ti2:3).\nThe soldier doesn’t have a problem with living in extreme conditions. He is, as a matter of fact, trained for that; comfort is never his goal and his patriotic spirit gets him ready to suffer willingly and he thinks of it to be an honor, to please ‘the one who enlisted him’ (2Ti2:4). He knows no respite in times of war and he doesn’t speak —or think— of working hours while facing the enemy. He breathes to see the last enemy killed.\nThe soldier’s life is that of self-sacrifice, obedience and facing danger. It’s a life of self-denial, and love for one another. They fight for their lives and their fellow soldier’s. When his fellow soldier’s been shot, he runs to his rescue and never leaves him alone, even if he’s dead! They work in a team and help each other execute orders and strategies planned by their generals.\nThis is what is missing in this individualist culture that is only concerned about self, not realizing the danger of never looking out for others. We forget that even though our fellow soldiers in the kingdom’s army have to fight, we have to help each other and fight the common enemy.\nThe bad news is that we fight mainly against self, but again against the world and the devil. It’s then to be understood that our battle isn’t against flesh and blood and so we’re doomed to fail. However, we have a hope; to fight in the strength of his might (Eph6:1) and we put on the whole armor of God to stand against the scheme of the devil (Eph6:2).\nA soldier without offensive weapons and defense equipment is just getting himself ready for disaster; he’s a joke to the enemy. That’s why we have to put on the whole armor of God (truth, righteousness, the readiness of the gospel of peace, faith, salvation and the Word of God: Eph6:14-16) and having done that, keep alert (watch, stay vigilant and being sober minded as the soldiers always prepared for battle) with all perseverance (it takes energy and discipline), making supplications for all saints (Eph6:18).\nThere’s something peculiar in ‘watching’ that even our Lord Jesus taught us that we have to keep on watching; never loosen up, till he returns. It has to be revived in our lives— at least in mine—and we have to accept the discomfort of always being alert and ready to fight. It is hard to stay in a state of alarm for a long time. It’s a time where endurance and patience is shaped. But our watch won’t matter if the battle is not fought by the Lord: the Christian soldier watches and rests upon the fact that the Lord is the supreme guardian over our souls; he’s our shield, protector and help in times of trouble. He’s the healer of our wounds, our peace and place of safety. I leave you with the words of our Lord; they’re simple and yet profound, short and yet meaningful:\n“Be on your guard and keep awake” (Mark13:33). “And what I say to you I say to all: Stay awake” (Mark13:37). Help us Lord…\nImage credit: The U.S. Army - Licensed by CC BY 2.0.\n","date":"10 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/weapons-of-our-warfare/","section":"Articles","summary":"It is hard to stay in a state of alarm for a long time. It’s a time where endurance and patience is shaped.","title":"The Weapons of Our Warfare","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"10 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/watch/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Watch","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"10 janvier 2015","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/weapons/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Weapons","type":"tags"},{"content":" \u0026ldquo;O what peace we often forfeit, o what needless pain we bear, All because we do not carry everything to God in prayer.\u0026rdquo;\nJoseph M. Scriven, 1855\nHe bid them come with him on the other side. Sailing wasn’t a problem for them; in fact some among them were very good at fishing. The sea was very calm and everything was peaceful and quiet as they left a couple of other boats on the shore. They knew the journey was a bit long (not very long though) and some because of the pressure of the crowd they longed for solitude and quiet. So, some availed themselves to the quiet factor of the sea, enjoyed the ride in contemplating the beautiful scenery listening to the sound of the water while others took the opportunity to rest, close their eyes and sleep for a moment.\nSome took the time to catch up with others, reminiscing the amazing things they have witnessed him do, commenting on this and that, wondering what is to be expected when they get on the other side because that man was peculiar and always full of surprises. Although the weather was a bit cold, the beautiful blue-colored sea and sky, the birds of the air, the fishes and the horizon made them forget about it.\nHowever, as time went by, it seemed that the sky went the wrong sort of color; it grew dark. Some wouldn’t worry at all if it was just the sky but the waves were swelling up little by little and the wind got stronger. Their optimistic minds liked to think it was just a small relapse of the weather and there was nothing to worry about. But things were getting worse, waves were building up very fast and it seemed they were rushing in the dark as clouds were piling up, the wind was very strong; too strong to move heavy things in the boat.\nTheir drab journey took another turn. Everybody got up and they got frantically busy. They all rushed to reef the sail. As soon as it was done a huge wave, higher than the mat—it seemed— rushed towards them. The people aboard were overcome with fear and they started to scream. It’s as if death was a certainty but somehow they were tossed by the wind to the top of it and as the wave got by the boat, it had to go down as if falling from a ten stories high building. Realizing their last breath was close, they all screamed as hard as they could, as if by this distress signal someone would come to help. But again, somehow the boat landed safely.\nThis went on a couple of times before they realize that someone among them was in the stern, asleep on the cushion. That was so irritating. How could he sleep with all the waters that was going in, threatening to make their boat sink? All of them were desperately trying to control the ship; in vain. But they’d not cope with a guy that is sleeping with all the help they could use.\n‘Master, do you not care that we drown?’ they bawled.\nAs their master woke up, they witnessed something their minds would probably never forget: He awoke and rebuked the wind and said to the sea: ‘Peace, Be still’. And the wind ceased and there was a great calm.\nThis was written a while ago, when I was meditating on this amazing story. However, feelings of ridicule and shame invaded me when none of what I learned was put to practice during these most stressful days of the year—Christmas and New Year celebrations. It is funny how we forget easily what we’ve learned when the most convenient time to remember and put it into practice has come.\nSeasons were carefully designed by God and each one has a purpose in it. Storms and times of great disturbance will come for sure; there’s nothing we can do about it. However our endeavors to keep our ship in control when we’re facing these trials will soon reveal to be of no avail. How remarkable is the inner peace of the Lord, knowing that he won’t be hurt or suffer any loss. His peace that caused him not to lose sleep in face of this big storm is just supernatural and one can’t but wonder.\nWhy running here and there trying to fix what is beyond your ability to manage? During those times; you can’t focus, can’t pray, and can’t think straight. You become easily irritable; you lose patience and all kindness. You lose any sense of gentleness and forget about self-control. You can’t come to a place of solitude and calm yourself down a little but you’re close to losing it and exhausted while trying to keep up with the times. You don’t have the strength to sit and pray because you feel like you’re wasting precious time in prayer instead of using it to fix and get things done.\nThis is where the words of the Lord cut deep through the roots of the issue: “Why are you so afraid? Have you still no faith?”(Mark4:40) Fear and unbelief are the roots of the issue. Why worry when the author of times and seasons is with us? Why won’t we tell him? Faith is it that moment we come, in prayer, to make our needs known and have comfort, sit back and give up our endeavors to the impossible and wait for his powerful hand to operate.\nMy plea is this simple… Take it to the Lord in prayer and see the peace you had forfeited, the needless pain you bore all because you couldn’t—out of fear— take it or give it to him in faith through prayer.\nImage credit: Christ in the Storm on the Sea of Galilee - Ludolf Bakhuizen - Public Domain\n","date":"26 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/peace/","section":"Articles","summary":"Why running here and there trying to fix what is beyond your ability to manage?","title":"Peace","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"26 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/storms/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Storms","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"26 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/stress/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Stress","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/bondage/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Bondage","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/bondage-of-the-will/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Bondage of the Will","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/freedom/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Freedom","type":"tags"},{"content":"So many times we hear motivational speeches about what we can do, what we could accomplish with the power within ourselves—the power that we, unfortunately, never use.\nThis has influenced us so much that it moved into our ‘pulpits’. We’re taught by some preachers that man has the ability within himself to change his life, that anyone can create their dreams by faith and spoken words. We just have to “visualize it”, according to them, or “speak it into existence” and thus create our desired reality.\nIn their (long) argument about free will, Martin Luther(1483-1546) wrote a book as a response to the writings of Erasmus(1466-1536). In this book, he not only refutes these teachings, but he even asserts that man, left to himself, does not even have the resources within himself to will or desire to do good.\nIn this short paragraph, Luther argues that man can’t even obey God’s commandments (Erasmus said that man can because otherwise, why would he be given them if he has no ability within himself to obey them?). Luther says:\n\u0026lsquo;The Diatribe constantly imagines a man who either can do what he is commanded, or at any rate knows that he cannot. But such a man is nowhere to be found. If there were such, then, in truth, either the commanding of impossibilities would be absurd, or the Spirit of Christ would be in vain. But the Scriptures set before us a man who is not only bound, wretched, captive, sick and dead, but who, through the operation of Satan his Lord, adds to his other miseries that of blindness, so that he believes himself free, happy, possessed of liberty and ability, whole and alive. Satan knows that if men knew their own misery he could keep no man in his kingdom; God could not fail at once to pity and succour wretchedness that knew itself and cried to him, for God is proclaimed with mighty praise throughout Scripture as being near the brokenhearted…\nBut through the work of Moses the lawgiver is the opposite of this-namely, through the law to lay open to man his own wretchedness, so that, by thus breaking him down, and confounding him in his self-knowledge, he may take him ready for grace, and send him to Christ to be saved. Therefore the function performed by the law is nothing to laugh at, but is most emphatically serious and necessary.\u0026rsquo; 1\nThis is how he responds to those who think they have anything good in themselves that is good, or magical. God’s commands were given to show us that we can’t obey them—for who can dare say he can, by himself, love God with all his mind and soul and strength? If you say you can, you haven’t understood the implications of that command. With the knowledge that we can’t obey them, we run to the one who can help us.\nThe power to change our lives isn’t in us—helpless and blind people— but it’s found in Him and we’ll do well to run to Him, our only hope.\nLuther Martin, The Bondage of the Will \u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n","date":"19 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/helpless/","section":"Articles","summary":"\u0026lsquo;He adds to his other miseries that of blindness, so that he believes himself free, happy, possessed of liberty and ability, whole and alive\u0026rsquo;","title":"Helpless","type":"articles"},{"content":"","date":"19 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/martin-luther/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Martin Luther","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"19 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/misery/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Misery","type":"tags"},{"content":"","date":"14 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/tags/eyes/","section":"Tags","summary":"","title":"Eyes","type":"tags"},{"content":"He doesn’t quite know what it is that they say. They tried to use words to describe what his mind could not grasp, a reality that is strange to his senses, something of a mesmerizing beauty with an incredible attractive force. He yearned for it. Anytime they mentioned it, his heart was throbbing and the urge grew stronger; an urge for that which everyone except him experienced. He started questioning: “What’s wrong with me?” “Why can’t I have it?” “Can anyone help or cure me?” “Is there any way out?”\nThose questions were pangs of sorrow in his mother’s heart. Not only didn’t she know how to answer that but also watching the face of his child realizing his bitter and painful condition was a grievous scene. She couldn’t help but try to dodge the issue by bringing up a different subject as tears welled up from her eyes. But it was without success. She felt helpless. She started thinking of ways of telling the matter to his boy wisely, and with love. She then sat down with him, scrubbed her tears off her face; her lip began to quiver as she held him tightly in her arms and told him she would never leave his side; that she’ll always love and care for him but most of all that she’ll be his eyes.\nWords could not be clear and tears won’t be withheld because she was overcome at the moment with empathy, as any mother would if they were in a situation when they have to tell to their boy that he was born blind; that he’ll probably never see while others could.\nAlthough the reality shattered his world, that intimate moment with his mother, her kindheartedness and compassion gave him comfort but it was just temporal. As he grew up, he couldn’t rely on his mum or dad in everything but he knew he had to start the painful discipline of learning to live without his eyes. He started to use the long stick to move around. He couldn’t do much with his life, and ended up substandard for there was no other carrier choice for him if not to become a beggar.\nHe’d been used to this life of blindness that left him often in a kind of solitude while begging in the streets for the whole day. He was vulnerable as people stole from him from time to time and that exactly was the stab in his open wound, ever reminding him of his weakness.\nHowever, this wasn’t the main reason he wanted to see. He wanted to see the sun, the sky, the trees, buildings, the water and these people that loved him. He wanted to see himself, the nature, or the beautiful things everyone talked about. He’s been wanting to see the face of a woman, a child… just to put a face to what he’s always been feeling with his touch; but alas, he’s been born that way and no medicine or person could open his eyes. There was no hope, no way out.\nAs Jesus passed by, he saw the blind man from birth. After his disciples finished asking him questions as to why the man was born so, he spit on the ground and made mud with saliva. Then he anointed the man’s eyes with the mud and said to him, ’Go, wash in the pool of Siloam’. So he went and the miracle came about; sight happened.\nLinger over this…\nSo quickly we pass over these familiar words that we’re blinded (pun intended) to what really happened. What I mean is that a man born blind really got his sight for the first time. But that isn’t at all the most amazing thing in the story. Jesus said that the reason the man was born blind is for ‘the works of God to be displayed in him’ (John 9:3).\nThat right there blew my mind away as I mused over it. These were not the familiar words anymore but these came to help me catch up cognitively with God’s wisdom. At first I asked: “How can anyone let his loved one go through this traumatic experience of God-knows-how-many-years of blindness?” “Is that love?” “Did it really come from a loving God to ordain the unbearable pain on the man for ‘his glory’?”\nBut as the text went on, it unleashed a truth that shut my insolent mind. The man, after walking out of blindness for the first time, couldn’t but think that Christ is from God: “If this man were not from God, he could do nothing” (John9:33). Afterwards, I witnessed a thousand more amazing miracle happen in this man’s life: Faith. He worships Christ (John9:38). Christ healed him of his physical blindness and that long physical blindness he went through set the stage for another healing: his spiritual eyes were opened and he could see.\nOh that we would see God’s goodness and infinite love in his design and as William Cowper says: “Behind a bitter providence, he hides a smiling face”. I’d rather be that man than being born with perfectly functioning eyes than being like those complacent Pharisees that refused to believe in Christ and die in my spiritual blindness for eternal destruction.\nIt all boils down with the words from Christ at the end of the story which became perfectly clear:\n\u0026ldquo;For judgment I came into this world that those who do not see may see and those who see may become blind.\u0026rdquo; John 9:39\n","date":"14 décembre 2014","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/articles/i-can-see/","section":"Articles","summary":"A man born blind really got his sight for the first time. But that isn’t at all the most amazing thing in the story","title":"I Can See","type":"articles"},{"content":"Well, what can I say? I do write notes about various issues and topics, mostly for myself—but you\u0026rsquo;re free to read along. I write to understand, and to arrange thoughts on the topic at hand. I do write sometimes to share about what I\u0026rsquo;ve learned, and do jot down some of the observations I gathered along the way. My thoughts are mainly aligned with a christian perspective, and even if we might be coming from different backgrounds or faiths; I hope this platform will communicate in considerate terms what is the christian hope and purpose and encouragement (meaning of the name Remesha).\nMy name is Remesha Yvan Florian. I\u0026rsquo;m married to Joy. I work as a software Engineer in Kampala. I love reading and I try to write. I do play the piano and enjoy a good run.\n","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/about/","section":"Remesha","summary":"","title":"About","type":"page"},{"content":"","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/authors/","section":"Authors","summary":"","title":"Authors","type":"authors"},{"content":"","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/email/","section":"Emails","summary":"","title":"Emails","type":"email"},{"content":"","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/fr/series/","section":"Series","summary":"","title":"Series","type":"series"},{"content":"If you’d like to be notified via email whenever a new article is published, submit your details below to receive the updates.\n","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/email/subscribe/","section":"Emails","summary":"","title":"Subscribe to Updates","type":"email"},{"content":"If you no longer wish to receive email updates from us, enter your email address below to unsubscribe.\n","externalUrl":null,"permalink":"/email/unsubscribe/","section":"Emails","summary":"","title":"Unsubscribe","type":"email"}]