Tuesday, December 13, 2011

God Week: Being a believer in God means rebelling against your human nature

Last time I had discussed the belief in God, I had made the comment that those who believe in God are actually rebelling against their own human nature. Now I will explain a little more on what I mean by that.

But first, a little kudos to a couple that I am often critical of, and that’s my own Marxist parents. Despite their wrong-headed beliefs about politics and the world in general, I give them credit for one thing: When they said that they would allow their children to forge their own paths, they truly meant it – even when it meant that one of those kids would eventually take up views contrary to their own. Despite our many disagreements, they are always respectful of my conservative views even if they wholeheartedly oppose them. Boy, was I ever a test of that particular philosophy - and they lived up to it! So, based on their example, I am respectful of their views in return. Heck, I recently admitted that I admire their styles of protest, and would even imitate their style if I ever lead an Occupy movement. If that ain’t a compliment, I don’t know what is!

Another example I learned from them is that just because you are being respectful of someone else’s views doesn’t mean that you can’t occasionally be vocal about your own views! As hard as it is to believe, you can be both loud about your views and still be respectful of the views of others. They did it all the time, and I try to do the same. Mainly, what I learned is that passion for one’s views is no sin, but actually a virtue; for if you don’t have the passion to fight for your beliefs, then why do you believe in them? That’s a lesson that I try to pass on to others. There ya go, Mom and Dad! A public compliment from me to you! :-D Luv ya! <3 <3 Mwah! <3 <3

The reason that I’m bringing up my parents here is because they are atheists, but despite that, atheism wasn’t what they tried to force down my throat. They did tell me of the “dangers” of believing in God, but they still let me decide the matter for myself. Mainly, I think they realized that God is very prevalent throughout our society and our culture, so there was not going to be any avoiding him unless they completely isolated me from the world - which was the last thing that they were going to do. So instead of trying to deny that he exists, they instead tried to give reasons as to why believing in God can often lead to heartache and disappointment. It was their reasoning that I would eventually see it for myself.

Well, I did see that for myself. I did indeed see that believing in God can lead to heartache and disappointment. Ha! I bet you didn’t expect me to agree to that, did ya? However, believing in God can also lead to joy and inspiration. The trick is on how you do this. What I mean is this: it all depends on what you believe God is, and what you expect him to do. Last time I had made mention of the term that I’ve heard atheists use in reference to God, and that's as a “magic genie in the sky that grants all your wishes.” If that is someone’s idea of God, then yes, it’s definitely a recipe for heartache and disappointment. But God is no genie.

Now, what I’m about to present here is my own take on God, and this is based on my own research of history (one of my great loves) and the “footprints” he left along the way in the parade of history, as well as my own experiences. He is there, if you know what you are looking for. Let’s take two examples of people who left their marks in history. One is Genghis Khan, who is alleged to have many descendants in the world because he had a very large harem, and because his sons also had very large harems. Because of that, Khan’s “footprints” are everywhere around the world.

Another historical person with footprints all over the world is Jesus Christ. Before I continue, I know some of you are probably thinking “Uh oh – she’s about to go preachy on us and evangelize her Christianity on us.” I know this, because I know how you guys think. LOL Anyway, I’m bringing Jesus up not to “push” him on you, but to discuss him from a historical standpoint, so I hope you bear with me and hear me out before dismissing me outright, because otherwise you’ll miss a point that I’m trying to make. I also know that some of you deny Jesus existed, but for argument’s sake, let’s say that he did. And for the record, I believe that he existed – which I would have to; otherwise, why would I call myself a Christian?

With that out of the way, let’s look at Jesus Christ. He died young – aged 33 – and left no descendants. Unlike Khan, he never traveled far from the country of his birth. And yet, his thoughts, his words, and his examples are still being lived and discussed to this day. Granted, some of his followers are not doing as good a job in following his examples as others are, but that’s true for any sort of organization; that is, every organization has its zealots and its slackers.

On the one hand, Khan left his “imprints” on history, and yet, what has that done for us – beyond the factual curiosity of a large number of descendants? There is no Ghengishan religion based on his thoughts and his actions. This is because Khan did not see what he did as something that was going to change the world for the better. Instead, he was looking out for himself. Well, he got his very large harem of women and the many children that came out of that, but once he died, he was dead, and no amount of mass copulation was going to change that. He lived according to his human nature and got what came out of that: many moments of physical pleasure for himself, and a large amount of descendants that came from it.

Contrast that with Jesus’ example of love and selflessness. He wasn’t setting out to leave a large number of descendants like Khan did, but instead to leave a large number of followers. And his message of selflessness contrasts with human nature, for it’s our nature to look out for ourselves first. His message of selflessness is difficult to follow – even for his followers – but at the same time, true believers can see how society as a whole can benefit from following his message of love and selflessness.

So how can a message of selflessness draw so many followers – especially in contrast to Khan’s much easier message of following your human nature? What is it that is so appealing to his followers that it quickly spread from his home country to all around the world in a relatively short amount of time? Friends, that’s what I’m still trying to figure out.

And yet, I can’t deny the results. I also can’t deny the appeal of his message of love, despite the difficult standards of selflessness that comes with it. Despite this difficult standard, I can see why this message is appealing, because I can reason out the positive results of what would happen if everyone puts the welfare of others ahead of themselves. In summary, to me God is no genie, but instead is the person of Jesus Christ and his message of love and selflessness in the service of others. That's a deity that's a lot more accessible than some distant spirit in the clouds.

So getting back to my initial statement, being a Christian in the true sense of the word is to be a rebel – a rebel against your human nature of selfishness. So in that light, it can be shown that Christianity is actually “progressive” in the true sense of the word, because progress is what would arise out of serving others before yourself.

Now contrast that with what today’s “Progressives" desire; which is actually REgressive, because they seek “doing your own thing”. This should sound familiar, because that’s what Genghis Khan did. Doing your own thing is the same thing as satisfying yourself first, and with the same results as what Khan got. I leave you with these questions: Has society benefited from liberals' message of "sex, drugs, and rock & roll"? How is such a philosophy better than a philosophy based on selflessness in the service of others?


My apologies for this extending into another week, but this post initially was longer, and after looking it over, I chopped off a big chunk of it and will save that part for later, because it’s actually more of a Christmas message than a discussion of what I brought up during my God Week. There’s other things that I wanted to bring up, but I’ll save those topics for another time.

No comments: