On this auspicious evening wherein we have celebrated the glorious Incarnation of God in man. First, the daily meanderings of my reading:
The central miracle asserted by Christians is the Incarnation. They say that God became Man. Every other miracle prepares for this, or exhibits this, or results from this. Just as every natural event is the manifestation at a particular place and moment of Nature's total character, so every particular Christian miracle manifests at a particular place and moment the charater and significance of the Incarnation. There is no question in Christianity of arbitrary interferences just scattered about. It relates not a series of disconnected raids on Nature but the various steps of a strategically coherent invasion - an invasion which intends complete conquest and 'occupation.' The fitness, and therefore credibility, of the particular miracles depends on their relation to the Grand Miracle; all discussion of them in isolation from it is futile.
The fitness or credibility of the Grand Miracle iteslf cannot, obviously, be judged by the same standard. And let us admit at once that it is very difficult to find a standard by which it can be judged. If the thing happened, it was the central even in the history of the Earth - the very thing that the whole story has been about.... it is easier to argue, on historical grounds, that the Incarnation actually occured than to show, on philosophical grounds, the probability of its occurence. The historical difficulty of giving for the life, saings and influence of Jesus any explanation that is not harder than the Christian explanation, is very great. The discrepancy between the depth and sanctity (and let me add) shrewdness of His moral teaching and rampant megalomania which must behind His theological teaching unless He is indeed God, has never been satisfactorily got over.
-C. S. Lewis, Miracles
Secondly, I've found a new avenue through song by which to worship my creator:
I see your face in every sunrise, the colors of the morning are inside your eyes
The world awakens in the light of the day, I look up to the sky and say
"You're Beautiful."
I see your power in the moonlit night, the planets are in motion and galaxies are bright
We are amazed in the light of the stars, its all proclaiming who you are:
"You're Beautiful."
I see you there hanging on a tree, you bled and then you died and then you rose again for me
Now are sitting on your heavenly throne, soon we will be coming home!
"You're Beautiful!"
When we arrive at Eternity's shore - where death is just a memory and tears are no more
We'll enter in as the wedding bells ring, your bride will come together and we'll sing
"You're Beautiful"
I see your face - You're Beautiful.
-Phil Wickham, You're Beautiful
Hoping this resonates with your heart as it does with mine,
a slight oscillation that besets my Spirit with tremulous adoration,
In overwhelming, tear-felt gratitude
-A
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
A Smogasbord of My Thoughts
Just a few things to present for further thoughts:
First, I've been reading G.K. Chesterton's book Orthodoxy, particularly the chapter "The Maniac." In this chapter, Chesterton attacks the self-centered ideology of materialism (and its eventual effect, fatalism). He does this by comparing the enslaving rationalism of materialism with the binding logic of the insane man. Here are his key points:
"The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits."
IE: The poet is free to dream, the logician is not. The pure logician must become a materialist, because his reason causes him to disbelieve anything beyond his own perceptions.
"The sane man knows that he has a touch of the beast, a touch of the devil, a touch f the saint, a touch of the citizen. Nay,the really sane man knows that he has a touch of the madman. But the materialist's world is quite simple and solid, just as the madman is quite sure he is sane."
IE: The sane man (which Chesterton makes synonymous with the Christian man) has the clarity of vision and soundness of mind for introspection. He is free to come to terms with the evil, the benign, the logical, and the mad. The materialist rejects all but one of these, and thus makes this one the full spectrum of his worldview. Logic is his system, and if nothing else can fit into the system of his logic, then it must be anathematized. In doing so, he comes to terms with the others only by means of his logic, and there his logic breaks. Madness makes no room for sanity, logic makes no room for the supernatural.
"The whole secret of mysticism is this: that man can understand everything by the help of what he does not understand."
This is the culmination of Chesterton's argument. That in using the paradox of madness, of the flippant, the asinine or the paradoxical, we can find the proper place for reasoning.
This is a brief, incomplete, and in all honesty, bad summary of the argument. I just wanted to get some thoughts down for later refinement. If anything, I am synchronizing Chesterton's arguments with the hypothesis I have been mulling over in my mind lately: That the empiricism of our ethos is broken.
Beyond this, I found this youtube video. I know its a little late, the election is over, and now we move on as a nation living with the consequences of our choices (whether these be beneficial or malicious, we shall see), but this video has caused me to rethink the way I voted, as well as my philosophy on how to approach the next four years:
Also, I want to read and examine this article later. I like John Piper's work.
One of my former profs mentioned the above to items in his web-log, which makes me think they are both worth further investigation and discussion.
First, I've been reading G.K. Chesterton's book Orthodoxy, particularly the chapter "The Maniac." In this chapter, Chesterton attacks the self-centered ideology of materialism (and its eventual effect, fatalism). He does this by comparing the enslaving rationalism of materialism with the binding logic of the insane man. Here are his key points:
"The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits."
IE: The poet is free to dream, the logician is not. The pure logician must become a materialist, because his reason causes him to disbelieve anything beyond his own perceptions.
"The sane man knows that he has a touch of the beast, a touch of the devil, a touch f the saint, a touch of the citizen. Nay,the really sane man knows that he has a touch of the madman. But the materialist's world is quite simple and solid, just as the madman is quite sure he is sane."
IE: The sane man (which Chesterton makes synonymous with the Christian man) has the clarity of vision and soundness of mind for introspection. He is free to come to terms with the evil, the benign, the logical, and the mad. The materialist rejects all but one of these, and thus makes this one the full spectrum of his worldview. Logic is his system, and if nothing else can fit into the system of his logic, then it must be anathematized. In doing so, he comes to terms with the others only by means of his logic, and there his logic breaks. Madness makes no room for sanity, logic makes no room for the supernatural.
"The whole secret of mysticism is this: that man can understand everything by the help of what he does not understand."
This is the culmination of Chesterton's argument. That in using the paradox of madness, of the flippant, the asinine or the paradoxical, we can find the proper place for reasoning.
This is a brief, incomplete, and in all honesty, bad summary of the argument. I just wanted to get some thoughts down for later refinement. If anything, I am synchronizing Chesterton's arguments with the hypothesis I have been mulling over in my mind lately: That the empiricism of our ethos is broken.
Beyond this, I found this youtube video. I know its a little late, the election is over, and now we move on as a nation living with the consequences of our choices (whether these be beneficial or malicious, we shall see), but this video has caused me to rethink the way I voted, as well as my philosophy on how to approach the next four years:
Also, I want to read and examine this article later. I like John Piper's work.
One of my former profs mentioned the above to items in his web-log, which makes me think they are both worth further investigation and discussion.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
A Dutiful Explanation
I feel obligated to write an illustrious and tantalizingly meaningful "first post," but whether it be my own admitted laziness, or an anomalous wave of humility, I will spare anyone reading this the exhausting thought of a self-aggrandizing, heart-felt, thought-provoking addition and simply state the simple matter.
I wrote this to be read, whether it be only by myself, or others.
I write this to remind my reader(s) of the kingdom of God, of our heavenly aspirations, and the eternal perspective from which (I believe) all Christians are consigned.
An explanation of this ledger's heading, "Miðgarðr" is as follows:
Due to my own fascination with mythology, particularly Norse mythology, as well as my own inclination for creative writing (and all its literary morsels like symbolism, metaphor, analogy, irony, yum yum yum), I have, in essence, stolen this word for my own purposes and aligned it with my own agenda in mind.* Miðgarðr is, in Norse mythology, that realm occupied by the creatures subject to the will of the gods. Those who, in vain efforts, struggle against their own mortality and dysfunction. That is, Miðgarðr, is the world of humans. It is literally the "Middle World." Simply put: it is our world.
I parallel with the scriptural passage found in John 15:19 (referenced in your address bar above after the "HTTP://"). It reads as follows:
I select this to remind myself that though I am an occupant of Miðgarðr, that the futile struggle is left here. That I am not a creature of, nor am I bound by the peurile conflicts and rebellion against mortality like those trapped in Miðgarðr, but am chosen out of the world by an everlasting source. No longer am I the rebel or broken warrior in a struggle against the gods, but the one God is now my exclusive source and ally. My battle is now against the holds of Miðgarðr alone, which imprisons me only for a short while, and though it hate me, I will relish upon this realm the same story of the God and merciful sacrifice of His son that has so freed me. This effort is not in vain, but comes to a glorious conclusion:
A final seat in the hall of Valhalla, the heavenly feasting table that awaits the broken warrior.
*Whether this is a heavenly agenda remains to be seen, I'm crossing my fingers, though.
I wrote this to be read, whether it be only by myself, or others.
I write this to remind my reader(s) of the kingdom of God, of our heavenly aspirations, and the eternal perspective from which (I believe) all Christians are consigned.
An explanation of this ledger's heading, "Miðgarðr" is as follows:
Due to my own fascination with mythology, particularly Norse mythology, as well as my own inclination for creative writing (and all its literary morsels like symbolism, metaphor, analogy, irony, yum yum yum), I have, in essence, stolen this word for my own purposes and aligned it with my own agenda in mind.* Miðgarðr is, in Norse mythology, that realm occupied by the creatures subject to the will of the gods. Those who, in vain efforts, struggle against their own mortality and dysfunction. That is, Miðgarðr, is the world of humans. It is literally the "Middle World." Simply put: it is our world.
I parallel with the scriptural passage found in John 15:19 (referenced in your address bar above after the "HTTP://"). It reads as follows:
"If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you."
I select this to remind myself that though I am an occupant of Miðgarðr, that the futile struggle is left here. That I am not a creature of, nor am I bound by the peurile conflicts and rebellion against mortality like those trapped in Miðgarðr, but am chosen out of the world by an everlasting source. No longer am I the rebel or broken warrior in a struggle against the gods, but the one God is now my exclusive source and ally. My battle is now against the holds of Miðgarðr alone, which imprisons me only for a short while, and though it hate me, I will relish upon this realm the same story of the God and merciful sacrifice of His son that has so freed me. This effort is not in vain, but comes to a glorious conclusion:
A final seat in the hall of Valhalla, the heavenly feasting table that awaits the broken warrior.
*Whether this is a heavenly agenda remains to be seen, I'm crossing my fingers, though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)